<?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 (12) TMI 1041 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269737</link>
    <description>Meal vouchers issued under a regulated payment system were not &quot;goods&quot; for octroi or local body tax purposes because the issuer did not sell a commodity, but only facilitated settlement under the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 and RBI directions. The vouchers were non-transferable, not independently marketable, and functioned only as a payment medium within an employer perquisite arrangement; the underlying food or goods were supplied by affiliate merchants, not by the issuer. On that basis, the transaction retained the character of a service rather than a sale of goods, and the vouchers were held not to fall within Section 2(25) of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, so no octroi or local body tax was payable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2025 12:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=409872" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 1041 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269737</link>
      <description>Meal vouchers issued under a regulated payment system were not &quot;goods&quot; for octroi or local body tax purposes because the issuer did not sell a commodity, but only facilitated settlement under the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 and RBI directions. The vouchers were non-transferable, not independently marketable, and functioned only as a payment medium within an employer perquisite arrangement; the underlying food or goods were supplied by affiliate merchants, not by the issuer. On that basis, the transaction retained the character of a service rather than a sale of goods, and the vouchers were held not to fall within Section 2(25) of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, so no octroi or local body tax was payable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269737</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>