<?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 (4) TMI 568 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163520</link>
    <description>The Karnataka High Court construed &quot;cement&quot; in entry 7 of Part C of the Second Schedule to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act broadly and held that the grouting material sold as &quot;Shrinkkomp&quot; remained cement despite its special expanding properties and use for grouting. It also held that separately specified packing material charges were excluded from turnover tax under section 6B because the proviso to that section governs the deduction scheme and such charges, when separately shown and not included in the goods price, cannot be added back. The classification issue was decided against the assessee, while the turnover tax issue was decided in its favour.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2014 17:58:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=351078" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 568 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163520</link>
      <description>The Karnataka High Court construed &quot;cement&quot; in entry 7 of Part C of the Second Schedule to the Karnataka Sales Tax Act broadly and held that the grouting material sold as &quot;Shrinkkomp&quot; remained cement despite its special expanding properties and use for grouting. It also held that separately specified packing material charges were excluded from turnover tax under section 6B because the proviso to that section governs the deduction scheme and such charges, when separately shown and not included in the goods price, cannot be added back. The classification issue was decided against the assessee, while the turnover tax issue was decided in its favour.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163520</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>