<?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 786 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333766</link>
    <description>An outboard marine engine used on fishing boats was held not to qualify as an agricultural input under Entry 42A of Schedule II of the Gujarat VAT Act because that entry is confined to notified goods linked to agriculture, meaning cultivation of land and allied operations; fishing does not fall within that statutory concept. The engine also did not qualify under Entry 58A as plant and machinery because &quot;plant&quot; had to be given its ordinary commercial meaning, the boat was not plant in common parlance, and the definition of capital goods under the Act could not expand the scope of the entry. The Tribunal&#039;s view was set aside and the Revenue&#039;s classification was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2018 16:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=445679" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 786 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333766</link>
      <description>An outboard marine engine used on fishing boats was held not to qualify as an agricultural input under Entry 42A of Schedule II of the Gujarat VAT Act because that entry is confined to notified goods linked to agriculture, meaning cultivation of land and allied operations; fishing does not fall within that statutory concept. The engine also did not qualify under Entry 58A as plant and machinery because &quot;plant&quot; had to be given its ordinary commercial meaning, the boat was not plant in common parlance, and the definition of capital goods under the Act could not expand the scope of the entry. The Tribunal&#039;s view was set aside and the Revenue&#039;s classification was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333766</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>