<?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>2014 (2) TMI 714 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244120</link>
    <description>Purchase tax under Section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act could not be levied on the assessee where the statutory conditions for that charge were not established and the goods had not suffered tax only because the first seller&#039;s turnover was below the taxable threshold. The HC noted that Section 3(1) imposed liability only when the prescribed turnover limit was crossed, while Section 7A operated as a separate purchase tax provision only in the circumstances specified by the Act. Since the levy was fixed at the point of first sale and no provision treated a later sale as the first taxable sale, the tax burden could not be shifted to the second seller. The revision failed and the order in favour of the assessee was confirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2014 12:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346339" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 714 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244120</link>
      <description>Purchase tax under Section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act could not be levied on the assessee where the statutory conditions for that charge were not established and the goods had not suffered tax only because the first seller&#039;s turnover was below the taxable threshold. The HC noted that Section 3(1) imposed liability only when the prescribed turnover limit was crossed, while Section 7A operated as a separate purchase tax provision only in the circumstances specified by the Act. Since the levy was fixed at the point of first sale and no provision treated a later sale as the first taxable sale, the tax burden could not be shifted to the second seller. The revision failed and the order in favour of the assessee was confirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>