<?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>2004 (3) TMI 736 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163494</link>
    <description>An industrial policy and exemption notification granting sales tax concession were construed strictly and held not to extend to purchase tax on raw coffee seeds. The repeated limitation of the concession to sales tax was treated as controlling, and the broader definition of tax could not be used to enlarge the exemption beyond its expressed subject-matter. The Court held that a clear exemption must be read as framed, without adding words or relying on authorities dealing with the sale and purchase aspects of a transaction in a different context. The assessee&#039;s claim for purchase tax relief was therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2014 15:00:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=351039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 736 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163494</link>
      <description>An industrial policy and exemption notification granting sales tax concession were construed strictly and held not to extend to purchase tax on raw coffee seeds. The repeated limitation of the concession to sales tax was treated as controlling, and the broader definition of tax could not be used to enlarge the exemption beyond its expressed subject-matter. The Court held that a clear exemption must be read as framed, without adding words or relying on authorities dealing with the sale and purchase aspects of a transaction in a different context. The assessee&#039;s claim for purchase tax relief was therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163494</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>