<?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 (11) TMI 860 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164918</link>
    <description>Packing material used for selling cement was held eligible for the concessional one per cent turnover tax rate under the notification dated 30 March 1994 if it had already suffered tax in an earlier transaction, because it would then constitute a second or subsequent sale within the scope of the reduced-rate scheme under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. The Court, however, found that the existing record did not conclusively establish whether prior taxation had in fact occurred, so the matter required fresh factual examination by the assessing officer. The legal question was answered in favour of the assessee, and the matter was remanded for verification of the factual position.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354934" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 860 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164918</link>
      <description>Packing material used for selling cement was held eligible for the concessional one per cent turnover tax rate under the notification dated 30 March 1994 if it had already suffered tax in an earlier transaction, because it would then constitute a second or subsequent sale within the scope of the reduced-rate scheme under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. The Court, however, found that the existing record did not conclusively establish whether prior taxation had in fact occurred, so the matter required fresh factual examination by the assessing officer. The legal question was answered in favour of the assessee, and the matter was remanded for verification of the factual position.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>