<?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 (9) TMI 1221 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332960</link>
    <description>Amounts paid by the purchaser for third-party performance testing and inspection were not part of the sale price under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act because the inspection was arranged at the purchaser&#039;s instance, separately borne by the purchaser, and was not a charge made by the dealer for anything done in respect of the goods at or before delivery. Set off on packing materials was also admissible under the Gujarat Sales Tax Rules, 1970, as the relevant conditions were satisfied and the entitlement depended on the real nature of the transaction and whether the packing material formed part of the commercial sale arrangement. Both issues were answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Mar 2017 18:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=443301" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 1221 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332960</link>
      <description>Amounts paid by the purchaser for third-party performance testing and inspection were not part of the sale price under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act because the inspection was arranged at the purchaser&#039;s instance, separately borne by the purchaser, and was not a charge made by the dealer for anything done in respect of the goods at or before delivery. Set off on packing materials was also admissible under the Gujarat Sales Tax Rules, 1970, as the relevant conditions were satisfied and the entitlement depended on the real nature of the transaction and whether the packing material formed part of the commercial sale arrangement. Both issues were answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332960</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>