<?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>2007 (2) TMI 73 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1497</link>
    <description>In inter-State works contracts under the Central Sales Tax Act, the absence of separate Central rules for determining sale price and turnover did not prevent assessment. Section 9(2) permits State authorities to use the State sales tax machinery for assessment and enforcement under the Central Act, and Section 13(3) allows State rules consistent with the Act and Central rules. Where the charging provision exists and the State rules provide a workable method for computing works-contract turnover, the State computation provisions may be applied by reference. The levy is not defeated merely because no separate Central computation rules were framed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2025 13:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40908" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 73 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1497</link>
      <description>In inter-State works contracts under the Central Sales Tax Act, the absence of separate Central rules for determining sale price and turnover did not prevent assessment. Section 9(2) permits State authorities to use the State sales tax machinery for assessment and enforcement under the Central Act, and Section 13(3) allows State rules consistent with the Act and Central rules. Where the charging provision exists and the State rules provide a workable method for computing works-contract turnover, the State computation provisions may be applied by reference. The levy is not defeated merely because no separate Central computation rules were framed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1497</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>