<?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>2009 (4) TMI 880 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164553</link>
    <description>Material supplied by a contractor for execution of a works contract is treated as a supply or sale to the awarder and is, in principle, taxable under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994; the earlier contrary view was rejected. However, where the entire works contract is covered by an exemption certificate against payment of a fixed exemption fee, the tax liability is replaced by that exemption regime, so ordinary tax under section 5A cannot be levied on the value of the bitumen as a purchase from unregistered dealers. In that setting, the assessing authority is confined to the exemption-fee liability, with no interest or penalty warranted on remand. The assessment was therefore required to be reconsidered on that limited basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2014 18:15:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354005" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 880 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164553</link>
      <description>Material supplied by a contractor for execution of a works contract is treated as a supply or sale to the awarder and is, in principle, taxable under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994; the earlier contrary view was rejected. However, where the entire works contract is covered by an exemption certificate against payment of a fixed exemption fee, the tax liability is replaced by that exemption regime, so ordinary tax under section 5A cannot be levied on the value of the bitumen as a purchase from unregistered dealers. In that setting, the assessing authority is confined to the exemption-fee liability, with no interest or penalty warranted on remand. The assessment was therefore required to be reconsidered on that limited basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164553</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>