<?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>2008 (9) TMI 901 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163857</link>
    <description>Rule 29(v) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Rules, 1949 was read as wider than section 5(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and was held to allow deduction from gross turnover where goods were proved to have been exported out of India, whether by the dealer directly or through intermediary or consecutive transactions. The interpretation in Mod. Serajuddin did not restrict the State rule in the same way. On the facts, the goods had admittedly moved through intermediary dealers before export, so the assessee&#039;s claim fell within the rule and the issue was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 18:08:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352082" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 901 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163857</link>
      <description>Rule 29(v) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Rules, 1949 was read as wider than section 5(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and was held to allow deduction from gross turnover where goods were proved to have been exported out of India, whether by the dealer directly or through intermediary or consecutive transactions. The interpretation in Mod. Serajuddin did not restrict the State rule in the same way. On the facts, the goods had admittedly moved through intermediary dealers before export, so the assessee&#039;s claim fell within the rule and the issue was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>