<?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 (7) TMI 892 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163973</link>
    <description>Amounts recovered from customers as &quot;security&quot; formed part of turnover under the U.P. Trade Tax Act because the statutory definition is wide, the sums were collected in the bills at 2% to 4%, and there was no evidence that they were refundable or ever returned. The separately charged insurance amount did not form part of turnover because it was collected independently, the goods were insured at customers&#039; request, and it was not part of the sale consideration or the aggregate amount for which the goods were sold. The revenue succeeded on the security amount, while the assessee succeeded on the insurance charge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2014 18:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352290" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 892 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163973</link>
      <description>Amounts recovered from customers as &quot;security&quot; formed part of turnover under the U.P. Trade Tax Act because the statutory definition is wide, the sums were collected in the bills at 2% to 4%, and there was no evidence that they were refundable or ever returned. The separately charged insurance amount did not form part of turnover because it was collected independently, the goods were insured at customers&#039; request, and it was not part of the sale consideration or the aggregate amount for which the goods were sold. The revenue succeeded on the security amount, while the assessee succeeded on the insurance charge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163973</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>