<?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>2011 (8) TMI 995 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165975</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to divide works contracts into parts for tax purposes, allowing for the taxation of goods used in contracts executed outside the State. It confirmed the State&#039;s legislative competence to tax deemed sales under the Central Sales Tax Act, relying on the legal fiction introduced by the constitutional amendment in Article 366(29A)(b). Previous judgments cited were deemed irrelevant, and the court supported the application of the Gannon Dunkerley &amp;amp; Co. decision in interpreting the tax implications of works contracts. The trade tax revision was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2014 23:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363514" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 995 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165975</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to divide works contracts into parts for tax purposes, allowing for the taxation of goods used in contracts executed outside the State. It confirmed the State&#039;s legislative competence to tax deemed sales under the Central Sales Tax Act, relying on the legal fiction introduced by the constitutional amendment in Article 366(29A)(b). Previous judgments cited were deemed irrelevant, and the court supported the application of the Gannon Dunkerley &amp;amp; Co. decision in interpreting the tax implications of works contracts. The trade tax revision was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165975</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>