<?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 (4) TMI 1090 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181015</link>
    <description>The court found in favor of the appellant, holding that the sale of cement and packing material were distinct and separate sales. The Commissioner&#039;s order was set aside, and the orders of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and the Commercial Tax Officer were restored. The court emphasized the significance of the invoice as evidence of the parties&#039; intention and the legislative provision allowing separate sales of cement and packing material.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2016 09:01:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=422745" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 1090 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181015</link>
      <description>The court found in favor of the appellant, holding that the sale of cement and packing material were distinct and separate sales. The Commissioner&#039;s order was set aside, and the orders of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and the Commercial Tax Officer were restored. The court emphasized the significance of the invoice as evidence of the parties&#039; intention and the legislative provision allowing separate sales of cement and packing material.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181015</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>