<?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 793 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162305</link>
    <description>The true character of a facade access system transaction depends on the contract as a whole, including the purchase and work orders, to determine whether the dominant object is transfer of goods or execution of work with materials used incidentally. A blanket classification as a sale of machinery is impermissible without examining the relevant documents. An advance ruling on sales tax must also be a speaking order based on the application and record; a cryptic ruling issued without considering the contracts and the sale-versus-works contract distinction cannot stand. The clarification was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Feb 2014 15:55:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346997" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 793 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162305</link>
      <description>The true character of a facade access system transaction depends on the contract as a whole, including the purchase and work orders, to determine whether the dominant object is transfer of goods or execution of work with materials used incidentally. A blanket classification as a sale of machinery is impermissible without examining the relevant documents. An advance ruling on sales tax must also be a speaking order based on the application and record; a cryptic ruling issued without considering the contracts and the sale-versus-works contract distinction cannot stand. The clarification was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162305</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>