<?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 (4) TMI 1253 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166384</link>
    <description>Naphtha purchased under a sales tax exemption scheme retained exemption only to the extent it was used in generating electricity consumed in the manufacture of caustic soda; the portion linked to electricity sold to GEB/UPL and other concerns lost the required manufacturing nexus, so tax under section 50(1) was upheld for that part. The authority also erred in reducing the exemption ceiling on the basis of branch transfers to the Vapi unit, because condition 19(iii) concerned goods transported outside Gujarat, not transfers within the State. The exemption reduction on that footing was therefore unsustainable and that issue was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2014 11:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=365572" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 1253 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166384</link>
      <description>Naphtha purchased under a sales tax exemption scheme retained exemption only to the extent it was used in generating electricity consumed in the manufacture of caustic soda; the portion linked to electricity sold to GEB/UPL and other concerns lost the required manufacturing nexus, so tax under section 50(1) was upheld for that part. The authority also erred in reducing the exemption ceiling on the basis of branch transfers to the Vapi unit, because condition 19(iii) concerned goods transported outside Gujarat, not transfers within the State. The exemption reduction on that footing was therefore unsustainable and that issue was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166384</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>