<?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>2001 (6) TMI 808 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162366</link>
    <description>Delivery of goods under a hire-purchase or instalment arrangement is treated as a sale under the deeming provision in Explanation I to section 2(n) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, even if title is retained as security for payment. On that basis, the transaction was regarded as a transfer of property for sales tax purposes, and the absence of the petitioner&#039;s name in the registration certificate did not establish ownership in the petitioner. The hire-purchase terms and alleged non-payment of instalments did not displace the statutory consequence. The attachment in revenue recovery proceedings was therefore upheld and the writ petition failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:32:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=347136" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (6) TMI 808 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162366</link>
      <description>Delivery of goods under a hire-purchase or instalment arrangement is treated as a sale under the deeming provision in Explanation I to section 2(n) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, even if title is retained as security for payment. On that basis, the transaction was regarded as a transfer of property for sales tax purposes, and the absence of the petitioner&#039;s name in the registration certificate did not establish ownership in the petitioner. The hire-purchase terms and alleged non-payment of instalments did not displace the statutory consequence. The attachment in revenue recovery proceedings was therefore upheld and the writ petition failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162366</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>