<?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 (8) TMI 848 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164318</link>
    <description>The High Court partially allowed the revision by remanding the first issue back to the Tribunal for further examination regarding the treatment of transportation charges in turnover. The Court upheld the decisions on the second issue, finding the dealer liable to pay tax on the cost of empty bottles for non-returned bottles. Additionally, the Court upheld the exemption for the exchange of empty bottles, aligning with legal precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2014 18:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353555" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 848 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164318</link>
      <description>The High Court partially allowed the revision by remanding the first issue back to the Tribunal for further examination regarding the treatment of transportation charges in turnover. The Court upheld the decisions on the second issue, finding the dealer liable to pay tax on the cost of empty bottles for non-returned bottles. Additionally, the Court upheld the exemption for the exchange of empty bottles, aligning with legal precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164318</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>