<?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 (12) TMI 577 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161382</link>
    <description>Fully automated photocopier machines controlled by microprocessors, microchips and electronic circuit boards were treated as electronic goods rather than duplicating machines for Central sales tax and U.P. trade tax classification. The Court accepted the undisputed factual position that the machines operated through programmed electronic control and held that this made them materially different from mechanical duplicators. It applied the Supreme Court&#039;s reasoning on microprocessor-controlled automated machines, and rejected contrary authorities and later administrative change for the relevant period. The alternative-remedy objection was not accepted because the dispute turned on undisputed facts and a pure question of classification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:24:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342907" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 577 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161382</link>
      <description>Fully automated photocopier machines controlled by microprocessors, microchips and electronic circuit boards were treated as electronic goods rather than duplicating machines for Central sales tax and U.P. trade tax classification. The Court accepted the undisputed factual position that the machines operated through programmed electronic control and held that this made them materially different from mechanical duplicators. It applied the Supreme Court&#039;s reasoning on microprocessor-controlled automated machines, and rejected contrary authorities and later administrative change for the relevant period. The alternative-remedy objection was not accepted because the dispute turned on undisputed facts and a pure question of classification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161382</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>