https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258609 An exemption entry covering agricultural implements notified by the State, including tractor trailers for use in agricultural purpose, was construed by the court to turn on intended use rather than direct sale to agriculturists. The phrase "for use" was read as "intended for use", so the dealer or distributor route did not defeat exemption and proof of actual end use was unnecessary. On that basis, the denial of exemption was held incorrect, and the tax demand and concurrent adverse orders were set aside. en-us Wed, 25 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Nov 2016 18:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258609 An exemption entry covering agricultural implements notified by the State, including tractor trailers for use in agricultural purpose, was construed by the court to turn on intended use rather than direct sale to agriculturists. The phrase "for use" was read as "intended for use", so the dealer or distributor route did not defeat exemption and proof of actual end use was unnecessary. On that basis, the denial of exemption was held incorrect, and the tax demand and concurrent adverse orders were set aside. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 25 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258609