<?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>2001 (3) TMI 1004 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160932</link>
    <description>Section 8D of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 was held unconstitutional because it shifted the incidence of sales tax from the sale of lottery tickets to the draw, displacing the Act&#039;s turnover-based charging structure and effectively taxing both the right to participate and the prize-linked component. That design was also held to offend Article 286(1)(a) because liability could attach to sales occurring outside Maharashtra by reference to an extra-territorial draw. Articles 301 to 304 were held inapplicable, since sale of lottery tickets is not trade or commerce for Article 301 purposes. The amendment was struck down and the earlier levy restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Dec 2013 17:14:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340889" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (3) TMI 1004 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160932</link>
      <description>Section 8D of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 was held unconstitutional because it shifted the incidence of sales tax from the sale of lottery tickets to the draw, displacing the Act&#039;s turnover-based charging structure and effectively taxing both the right to participate and the prize-linked component. That design was also held to offend Article 286(1)(a) because liability could attach to sales occurring outside Maharashtra by reference to an extra-territorial draw. Articles 301 to 304 were held inapplicable, since sale of lottery tickets is not trade or commerce for Article 301 purposes. The amendment was struck down and the earlier levy restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160932</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>