<?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 (7) TMI 139 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329541</link>
    <description>The Tribunal was required to examine whether Section 4 of the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1987 applied to the tax dispute under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, because the contention went to the root of the matter. Its refusal to deal with that issue on the merits was held to be erroneous and unsustainable. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration so the Tribunal could determine the applicability of the price control provision before resolving the dispute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:59:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433840" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 139 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329541</link>
      <description>The Tribunal was required to examine whether Section 4 of the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1987 applied to the tax dispute under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, because the contention went to the root of the matter. Its refusal to deal with that issue on the merits was held to be erroneous and unsustainable. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration so the Tribunal could determine the applicability of the price control provision before resolving the dispute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329541</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>