<?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 554 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162307</link>
    <description>Goods purchased against form C must be specifically covered by the registration certificate and genuinely fall within the statutory purpose of manufacture or processing for sale. For the electronic weigh bridge, the record did not contain a definite finding on whether it was directly connected with the manufacturing process, so the matter required fresh factual determination on remand. For the P.C. computer system with keyboard and monitor, the goods were not covered by the registration certificate and were not shown to be machinery; use of form C for such unauthorised goods constituted misuse and supported penalty, which was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Feb 2014 16:01:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346999" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 554 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162307</link>
      <description>Goods purchased against form C must be specifically covered by the registration certificate and genuinely fall within the statutory purpose of manufacture or processing for sale. For the electronic weigh bridge, the record did not contain a definite finding on whether it was directly connected with the manufacturing process, so the matter required fresh factual determination on remand. For the P.C. computer system with keyboard and monitor, the goods were not covered by the registration certificate and were not shown to be machinery; use of form C for such unauthorised goods constituted misuse and supported penalty, which was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162307</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>