<?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 (5) TMI 547 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161972</link>
    <description>Whether printing jobs on customer-supplied paper constitute a works contract depends on the factual nature of each contract and the dominant intention of the parties. After the Forty-sixth Amendment, tax may be levied on the transfer of property in goods involved in a works contract, but that characterisation cannot be decided in the abstract. Where the assessing authority will examine each contract and the assessee can raise all objections in assessment proceedings, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is ordinarily not appropriate. The petition was therefore held not fit for writ intervention, and the parties were directed to pursue the dispute before the assessing authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:18:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=345732" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 547 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161972</link>
      <description>Whether printing jobs on customer-supplied paper constitute a works contract depends on the factual nature of each contract and the dominant intention of the parties. After the Forty-sixth Amendment, tax may be levied on the transfer of property in goods involved in a works contract, but that characterisation cannot be decided in the abstract. Where the assessing authority will examine each contract and the assessee can raise all objections in assessment proceedings, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is ordinarily not appropriate. The petition was therefore held not fit for writ intervention, and the parties were directed to pursue the dispute before the assessing authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161972</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>