<?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 (2) TMI 790 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164708</link>
    <description>The Kerala HC overturned the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision, holding that the respondent must pay purchase tax on bullion bought from non-resident Indians for manufacturing ornaments. The court emphasized that purchase tax applies if the commodity is taxable and purchased without the seller paying tax. The respondent was directed to provide evidence of purchases from non-residents to prove tax liability under section 5(1) to avoid liability under section 5A. The case was remanded for further investigation, giving the respondent two months to submit required documentation. Failure to do so would confirm liability under section 5A, with seller assessment limitations not justifying imposing liability on the respondent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2014 12:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354331" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 790 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164708</link>
      <description>The Kerala HC overturned the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision, holding that the respondent must pay purchase tax on bullion bought from non-resident Indians for manufacturing ornaments. The court emphasized that purchase tax applies if the commodity is taxable and purchased without the seller paying tax. The respondent was directed to provide evidence of purchases from non-residents to prove tax liability under section 5(1) to avoid liability under section 5A. The case was remanded for further investigation, giving the respondent two months to submit required documentation. Failure to do so would confirm liability under section 5A, with seller assessment limitations not justifying imposing liability on the respondent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164708</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>