<?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>2003 (11) TMI 581 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163445</link>
    <description>Successive rate notifications were read together to determine the applicable sales tax treatment of stoneware crockery. Stoneware was treated as a distinct category in the 1979 notification, but that classification did not remove it from the tax net. The 1984 amendment then brought crockery covered by the 1977 notification, including stoneware, under a uniform 15% rate from 1 April 1984. The prior treatment of stoneware as a taxable commodity under the earlier sales tax law supported that construction. The substantive assessment and appellate orders were therefore sustained, and the challenge to the higher rate failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2014 16:28:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=350950" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (11) TMI 581 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163445</link>
      <description>Successive rate notifications were read together to determine the applicable sales tax treatment of stoneware crockery. Stoneware was treated as a distinct category in the 1979 notification, but that classification did not remove it from the tax net. The 1984 amendment then brought crockery covered by the 1977 notification, including stoneware, under a uniform 15% rate from 1 April 1984. The prior treatment of stoneware as a taxable commodity under the earlier sales tax law supported that construction. The substantive assessment and appellate orders were therefore sustained, and the challenge to the higher rate failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163445</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>