<?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 (10) TMI 1122 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161065</link>
    <description>An exemption under G.O. Ms. No. 2566, Revenue, issued under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, had to be construed in ordinary commercial parlance and only within the conditions stated in the notification. Poultry feed was treated as a distinct commodity from cereals and pulses, so the dealer&#039;s certificate and financing references could not enlarge the scope of the exemption; the claim failed on that issue. The Tribunal had also left undecided contentions concerning leather goods and turnover tax on certain second sales, and those matters were remanded for fresh consideration after giving the dealer a reasonable opportunity.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Dec 2013 14:40:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=341356" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 1122 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161065</link>
      <description>An exemption under G.O. Ms. No. 2566, Revenue, issued under Section 9 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, had to be construed in ordinary commercial parlance and only within the conditions stated in the notification. Poultry feed was treated as a distinct commodity from cereals and pulses, so the dealer&#039;s certificate and financing references could not enlarge the scope of the exemption; the claim failed on that issue. The Tribunal had also left undecided contentions concerning leather goods and turnover tax on certain second sales, and those matters were remanded for fresh consideration after giving the dealer a reasonable opportunity.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161065</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>