<?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>2002 (6) TMI 578 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160916</link>
    <description>A Port Trust is not treated as a dealer liable to sales tax on receipts from tender forms, cranage, pilotage and similar ancillary services unless those activities amount to business under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The statutory definition of dealer, read with the charging provision, requires a business activity; mere receipt of money from functions connected with port operations is insufficient. Explanation IV to section 2(e) enlarges the class of persons covered, but does not remove the need to prove business. On that basis, the disputed receipts were regarded as part of statutory port functions and not taxable business turnover.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Dec 2013 15:42:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340873" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (6) TMI 578 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160916</link>
      <description>A Port Trust is not treated as a dealer liable to sales tax on receipts from tender forms, cranage, pilotage and similar ancillary services unless those activities amount to business under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The statutory definition of dealer, read with the charging provision, requires a business activity; mere receipt of money from functions connected with port operations is insufficient. Explanation IV to section 2(e) enlarges the class of persons covered, but does not remove the need to prove business. On that basis, the disputed receipts were regarded as part of statutory port functions and not taxable business turnover.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160916</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>