<?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>1998 (8) TMI 595 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171656</link>
    <description>Supply of printed receipt books was treated as a composite printing transaction rather than a sale of goods, because the paper and ink used were the printer&#039;s property only until the printing work was completed and any transfer of those materials was merely incidental to the main obligation to execute the printing job. On the facts found, the dominant nature of the contract was work and labour, not a transfer of chattel as such. The transaction was therefore characterised as a works contract and not a sale.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:52:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=391558" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 595 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171656</link>
      <description>Supply of printed receipt books was treated as a composite printing transaction rather than a sale of goods, because the paper and ink used were the printer&#039;s property only until the printing work was completed and any transfer of those materials was merely incidental to the main obligation to execute the printing job. On the facts found, the dominant nature of the contract was work and labour, not a transfer of chattel as such. The transaction was therefore characterised as a works contract and not a sale.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171656</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>