<?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 997 - JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165989</link>
    <description>A dealer registered only for sale and purchase of specified goods for resale cannot be treated as registered for works-contract services unless the registration expressly covers that activity. A reference to the dealer as a works contractor in an assessment order does not, by itself, confer such registration. On that footing, the assessing authority was entitled to treat the petitioner as an unregistered dealer for the turnkey installation transaction and to invoke the security and seizure provisions. The challenge to the notices and security orders therefore failed, and the writ petitions were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2014 22:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363528" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 997 - JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165989</link>
      <description>A dealer registered only for sale and purchase of specified goods for resale cannot be treated as registered for works-contract services unless the registration expressly covers that activity. A reference to the dealer as a works contractor in an assessment order does not, by itself, confer such registration. On that footing, the assessing authority was entitled to treat the petitioner as an unregistered dealer for the turnkey installation transaction and to invoke the security and seizure provisions. The challenge to the notices and security orders therefore failed, and the writ petitions were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165989</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>