<?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>2010 (3) TMI 1045 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165487</link>
    <description>Resin coated sand was treated as distinct from ordinary sand because it undergoes a manufacturing process, so it did not fall within entry 83 of the Third Schedule and was classified under the residuary provision. The contrary classification by the Advance Rulings Authority could not stand because the Tribunal&#039;s earlier view on the commodity&#039;s nature had already attained finality and should have been followed. On the temporal effect of the Commissioner&#039;s suo motu revisional order under section 64(2), the correction operated prospectively only and did not create retrospective liability, particularly where tax had been collected at the lower rate on the basis of the earlier clarification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2014 10:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=360390" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 1045 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165487</link>
      <description>Resin coated sand was treated as distinct from ordinary sand because it undergoes a manufacturing process, so it did not fall within entry 83 of the Third Schedule and was classified under the residuary provision. The contrary classification by the Advance Rulings Authority could not stand because the Tribunal&#039;s earlier view on the commodity&#039;s nature had already attained finality and should have been followed. On the temporal effect of the Commissioner&#039;s suo motu revisional order under section 64(2), the correction operated prospectively only and did not create retrospective liability, particularly where tax had been collected at the lower rate on the basis of the earlier clarification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165487</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>