<?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 (10) TMI 660 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333640</link>
    <description>Market fee or cess paid by the purchaser to a market committee under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Produce Marketing Regulation Act, 1987 was held to be outside the sale consideration, as it was payable for services in the regulated market and not as part of the purchase price. As a result, it did not fall within taxable turnover under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and could not be added for sales tax purposes. The impugned notice was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2016 16:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=445395" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 660 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333640</link>
      <description>Market fee or cess paid by the purchaser to a market committee under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Produce Marketing Regulation Act, 1987 was held to be outside the sale consideration, as it was payable for services in the regulated market and not as part of the purchase price. As a result, it did not fall within taxable turnover under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and could not be added for sales tax purposes. The impugned notice was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333640</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>