<?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>2006 (4) TMI 486 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162972</link>
    <description>Export-linked turnover was deductible under the Punjab General Sales Tax Rules where goods sold to the State Trading Corporation were proved to have been exported out of India, whether through one transaction or a series of transactions. The deduction provision was treated as independent and more liberal than section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, so the earlier restrictive export-sale principle did not apply on these facts. As the legal issue had already been settled, the court did not require a further reference merely to prolong the matter, and the referred question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2014 16:50:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=349056" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (4) TMI 486 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162972</link>
      <description>Export-linked turnover was deductible under the Punjab General Sales Tax Rules where goods sold to the State Trading Corporation were proved to have been exported out of India, whether through one transaction or a series of transactions. The deduction provision was treated as independent and more liberal than section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, so the earlier restrictive export-sale principle did not apply on these facts. As the legal issue had already been settled, the court did not require a further reference merely to prolong the matter, and the referred question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162972</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>