<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1999 (12) TMI 846 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160406</link>
    <description>The exemption notification for the Devasthanams was limited to sales and purchases of goods and did not extend to deemed sales arising from transfer of materials in execution of a works contract. Those deemed sales remained subject to tax deduction at source under section 5-H after the statutory recognition of works contract transfers as sales, and an executive circular could not widen the exemption. However, no deduction could be made from owner-supplied materials such as cement and steel, because there was no taxable sale by the contractor in respect of those items, and the labour component was also outside deduction as separately identifiable under rule 6.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2013 16:33:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=339683" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (12) TMI 846 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160406</link>
      <description>The exemption notification for the Devasthanams was limited to sales and purchases of goods and did not extend to deemed sales arising from transfer of materials in execution of a works contract. Those deemed sales remained subject to tax deduction at source under section 5-H after the statutory recognition of works contract transfers as sales, and an executive circular could not widen the exemption. However, no deduction could be made from owner-supplied materials such as cement and steel, because there was no taxable sale by the contractor in respect of those items, and the labour component was also outside deduction as separately identifiable under rule 6.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160406</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>