<?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 (11) TMI 648 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164747</link>
    <description>A residential flat construction arrangement entered into before completion of the units, under a structured lease and allotment project with staged sub-lease and buyer-linked payments, is treated as a works contract for VAT purposes when the developer is effectively constructing for prospective allottees. The petitioner&#039;s compounding application was treated as supporting the character of the activity. Once the activity fell within the statutory definition of works contract, the challenge based on absence of authority of law under Article 265 could not succeed, and the VAT levy remained within the governing statute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 18:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (11) TMI 648 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164747</link>
      <description>A residential flat construction arrangement entered into before completion of the units, under a structured lease and allotment project with staged sub-lease and buyer-linked payments, is treated as a works contract for VAT purposes when the developer is effectively constructing for prospective allottees. The petitioner&#039;s compounding application was treated as supporting the character of the activity. Once the activity fell within the statutory definition of works contract, the challenge based on absence of authority of law under Article 265 could not succeed, and the VAT levy remained within the governing statute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164747</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>