<?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>2005 (2) TMI 786 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161938</link>
    <description>Auction sales of sandalwood in Tamil Nadu are treated as inter-State sales only if the sale contract expressly or impliedly requires movement of the goods to another State and the movement is occasioned by that contract. Where the purchaser&#039;s later transport decision is independent of the auction purchase, the transaction remains intra-State. Forest controls, transport permits, and certificates did not create any contractual obligation to move the sandalwood to Karnataka. The Tamil Nadu seller was concerned only with the sale price and did not covenant for out-of-State movement. The court therefore treated the movement as voluntary and held that the sales were local sales, not sales chargeable under the Central Sales Tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 May 2024 10:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=345680" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 786 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161938</link>
      <description>Auction sales of sandalwood in Tamil Nadu are treated as inter-State sales only if the sale contract expressly or impliedly requires movement of the goods to another State and the movement is occasioned by that contract. Where the purchaser&#039;s later transport decision is independent of the auction purchase, the transaction remains intra-State. Forest controls, transport permits, and certificates did not create any contractual obligation to move the sandalwood to Karnataka. The Tamil Nadu seller was concerned only with the sale price and did not covenant for out-of-State movement. The court therefore treated the movement as voluntary and held that the sales were local sales, not sales chargeable under the Central Sales Tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161938</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>