<?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 (3) TMI 722 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163115</link>
    <description>Desilting, filtration and purification of water by a Jal Sansthan did not amount to manufacture or business for levy under section 3G(3) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. The definition of &quot;manufacture&quot; in section 2(e1) is wide, but its scope must be read in context, and section 3G(2) applies to goods purchased for resale or for use in manufacture or packing of goods for sale. A Jal Sansthan constituted under the U.P. Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975 performs a statutory public utility function, not a separate commercial manufacturing venture. The tax demand for alleged misuse of form IIID was therefore not sustainable, and the revisions were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2014 11:50:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=349513" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 722 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163115</link>
      <description>Desilting, filtration and purification of water by a Jal Sansthan did not amount to manufacture or business for levy under section 3G(3) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. The definition of &quot;manufacture&quot; in section 2(e1) is wide, but its scope must be read in context, and section 3G(2) applies to goods purchased for resale or for use in manufacture or packing of goods for sale. A Jal Sansthan constituted under the U.P. Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975 performs a statutory public utility function, not a separate commercial manufacturing venture. The tax demand for alleged misuse of form IIID was therefore not sustainable, and the revisions were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163115</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>