<?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>2007 (10) TMI 598 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163701</link>
    <description>A notification granting a monetary exemption to an institution was construed as attaching the benefit to the institution as a whole, not separately to each unit, because the text did not provide for unit-wise ceilings; the unit-wise claim was rejected. Compensation received for non-lifting of goods was treated as compensation under the agreement, not sale consideration, and therefore did not fall within turnover under the U.P. Trade Tax Act; that exclusion was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2014 13:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=351562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 598 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163701</link>
      <description>A notification granting a monetary exemption to an institution was construed as attaching the benefit to the institution as a whole, not separately to each unit, because the text did not provide for unit-wise ceilings; the unit-wise claim was rejected. Compensation received for non-lifting of goods was treated as compensation under the agreement, not sale consideration, and therefore did not fall within turnover under the U.P. Trade Tax Act; that exclusion was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163701</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>