<?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>2014 (4) TMI 594 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246157</link>
    <description>Section 5(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, was construed as a special deeming provision overriding the general charging provision and treating the sale by the brand name holder or trade mark holder within the State as the first sale for tax purposes where goods are sold under a brand name. The Court held that, on these facts, the appellant as brand name holder was liable to tax on the first sale, even though the licensee manufactured the goods for sale to it. Any tax already paid at an earlier stage by the manufacturer did not defeat the levy; the proper remedy was a refund claim, not avoidance of liability under Section 5(2).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352496" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (4) TMI 594 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246157</link>
      <description>Section 5(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, was construed as a special deeming provision overriding the general charging provision and treating the sale by the brand name holder or trade mark holder within the State as the first sale for tax purposes where goods are sold under a brand name. The Court held that, on these facts, the appellant as brand name holder was liable to tax on the first sale, even though the licensee manufactured the goods for sale to it. Any tax already paid at an earlier stage by the manufacturer did not defeat the levy; the proper remedy was a refund claim, not avoidance of liability under Section 5(2).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246157</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>