<?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 761 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161708</link>
    <description>Consumables used in a works contract are deductible only where they are actually incurred in execution of the contract and do not involve any transfer of property in goods. On that basis, items such as water, electricity and fuel may qualify because they are consumed without identifiable existence in the end-product. Dyes used in processing were not deductible because they remained as colour in the fabric and did not cease to exist after use. Chemicals were not fully shown to have been consumed, but an estimated deduction had already been allowed and was not disturbed. The deduction claim therefore failed in respect of dyes, while the chemicals allowance was left intact.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2014 16:44:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=344882" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 761 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161708</link>
      <description>Consumables used in a works contract are deductible only where they are actually incurred in execution of the contract and do not involve any transfer of property in goods. On that basis, items such as water, electricity and fuel may qualify because they are consumed without identifiable existence in the end-product. Dyes used in processing were not deductible because they remained as colour in the fabric and did not cease to exist after use. Chemicals were not fully shown to have been consumed, but an estimated deduction had already been allowed and was not disturbed. The deduction claim therefore failed in respect of dyes, while the chemicals allowance was left intact.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161708</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>