<?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 (4) TMI 691 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163925</link>
    <description>Entry tax under section 3(1) of the M.P. (C.G.) Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 is attracted only when goods enter a local area for consumption, use, or sale in that area, because the word &quot;therein&quot; confines the levy to the area of intended consumption or use. Coal that moved through a pit mouth, weighbridge, silo, or railway siding only as part of a continuous transit to another destination did not satisfy that condition, so the levy was unsustainable. The petitions were allowed and the assessment, reassessment, penalty, and demand proceedings based on the disputed tax were quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2014 12:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352164" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 691 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163925</link>
      <description>Entry tax under section 3(1) of the M.P. (C.G.) Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 is attracted only when goods enter a local area for consumption, use, or sale in that area, because the word &quot;therein&quot; confines the levy to the area of intended consumption or use. Coal that moved through a pit mouth, weighbridge, silo, or railway siding only as part of a continuous transit to another destination did not satisfy that condition, so the levy was unsustainable. The petitions were allowed and the assessment, reassessment, penalty, and demand proceedings based on the disputed tax were quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163925</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>