<?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 808 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162689</link>
    <description>Rule 6(4)(m)(i) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Rules, 1957 was examined as a computation provision under section 5-B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The rule was treated as part of the machinery for determining taxable turnover by permitting specified deductions from total turnover, not as a source of charge or an enlargement of statutory liability. Even if an assessing authority applied the rule incorrectly and brought exempt turnover into tax, that misapplication would not render the rule itself invalid. The provision was therefore held not to be ultra vires section 5-B, and the challenge to its validity failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2014 17:15:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348432" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 808 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162689</link>
      <description>Rule 6(4)(m)(i) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Rules, 1957 was examined as a computation provision under section 5-B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957. The rule was treated as part of the machinery for determining taxable turnover by permitting specified deductions from total turnover, not as a source of charge or an enlargement of statutory liability. Even if an assessing authority applied the rule incorrectly and brought exempt turnover into tax, that misapplication would not render the rule itself invalid. The provision was therefore held not to be ultra vires section 5-B, and the challenge to its validity failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162689</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>