<?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>2016 (1) TMI 1046 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271254</link>
    <description>For a new motor vehicle, registration is a post-sale requirement, but the sale is treated as complete only when lawful possession is delivered in a deliverable and registrable state, ordinarily at or near the registration office. Until that stage, the vehicle is treated as unascertained or future goods and becomes ascertained only on appropriation for registration. Applying the constitutional and sales law rules on place of sale, the materials did not conclusively show that the transactions were completed in Kerala or that they were colourable devices to evade tax. The penalty was therefore not sustainable, and the finding in favour of the assessee was maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2022 11:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=414884" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 1046 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271254</link>
      <description>For a new motor vehicle, registration is a post-sale requirement, but the sale is treated as complete only when lawful possession is delivered in a deliverable and registrable state, ordinarily at or near the registration office. Until that stage, the vehicle is treated as unascertained or future goods and becomes ascertained only on appropriation for registration. Applying the constitutional and sales law rules on place of sale, the materials did not conclusively show that the transactions were completed in Kerala or that they were colourable devices to evade tax. The penalty was therefore not sustainable, and the finding in favour of the assessee was maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271254</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>