<?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 (10) TMI 760 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161614</link>
    <description>Cardamom subjected to a controlled curing process was held not to retain the character of agricultural produce for exemption under Explanation (1) to section 2(r) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The provision saves only mere cleaning, grading, sorting or drying, but excludes produce that has undergone a physical, chemical or other process making it fit for consumption. On the accepted facts, the curing process did more than remove moisture and also improved shine while preserving aroma and flavour. The High Court found no reason under Article 226 to disturb the concurrent factual findings, and the exemption was unavailable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Feb 2014 17:45:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=344584" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 760 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161614</link>
      <description>Cardamom subjected to a controlled curing process was held not to retain the character of agricultural produce for exemption under Explanation (1) to section 2(r) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The provision saves only mere cleaning, grading, sorting or drying, but excludes produce that has undergone a physical, chemical or other process making it fit for consumption. On the accepted facts, the curing process did more than remove moisture and also improved shine while preserving aroma and flavour. The High Court found no reason under Article 226 to disturb the concurrent factual findings, and the exemption was unavailable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161614</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>