<?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>2015 (4) TMI 168 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258286</link>
    <description>Butter and ghee sold under a brand name remained eligible for the reduced sales tax rate of 10% for the relevant period where a valid rate-reducing notification was in force, even after substitution of the taxing entry in the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. The substitution of Entry 8 in Part D did not by itself withdraw the earlier notification benefit, and the later erratum supported the continued applicability of the reduced rate until the amendment took effect. The Tribunal was noted to have failed to apply the entry and notification as they stood for the assessment year concerned, and the higher demand at 11% was treated as unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2015 16:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=380528" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 168 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258286</link>
      <description>Butter and ghee sold under a brand name remained eligible for the reduced sales tax rate of 10% for the relevant period where a valid rate-reducing notification was in force, even after substitution of the taxing entry in the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. The substitution of Entry 8 in Part D did not by itself withdraw the earlier notification benefit, and the later erratum supported the continued applicability of the reduced rate until the amendment took effect. The Tribunal was noted to have failed to apply the entry and notification as they stood for the assessment year concerned, and the higher demand at 11% was treated as unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258286</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>