<?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>2004 (12) TMI 648 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161833</link>
    <description>Sales are inter-State under section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act where movement of goods from one State to another is occasioned by the contract of sale, even if the contract does not expressly say so. The place where property passes is irrelevant if the movement is the result of the sale transaction. On the documentary record, including indent memos, invoices, excise gate passes, shipping memos and form C declarations, the goods were ordered from Rajasthan, dispatched from Gujarat and moved pursuant to the sale arrangement; the Revenue did not rebut this. The Tribunal&#039;s finding that the transactions were inter-State sales, not local sales under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, was upheld in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:21:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=345350" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 648 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161833</link>
      <description>Sales are inter-State under section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act where movement of goods from one State to another is occasioned by the contract of sale, even if the contract does not expressly say so. The place where property passes is irrelevant if the movement is the result of the sale transaction. On the documentary record, including indent memos, invoices, excise gate passes, shipping memos and form C declarations, the goods were ordered from Rajasthan, dispatched from Gujarat and moved pursuant to the sale arrangement; the Revenue did not rebut this. The Tribunal&#039;s finding that the transactions were inter-State sales, not local sales under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, was upheld in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161833</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>