<?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 (8) TMI 1099 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164628</link>
    <description>Amounts incurred by the purchaser after delivery of fly ash at the thermal power station site, including drying, loading, transport and unloading charges, were held to be post-sale expenses and not part of the consideration paid or payable for the purchase. As the sale was complete on acceptance of delivery ex-site and the buyer bore removal at its own risk and expense, those charges could not be included in purchase turnover for levy under section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The revenue&#039;s contention to include such expenditure in taxable turnover therefore failed, and the question of law was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2014 19:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354201" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 1099 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164628</link>
      <description>Amounts incurred by the purchaser after delivery of fly ash at the thermal power station site, including drying, loading, transport and unloading charges, were held to be post-sale expenses and not part of the consideration paid or payable for the purchase. As the sale was complete on acceptance of delivery ex-site and the buyer bore removal at its own risk and expense, those charges could not be included in purchase turnover for levy under section 7A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The revenue&#039;s contention to include such expenditure in taxable turnover therefore failed, and the question of law was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164628</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>