<?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 (11) TMI 546 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334528</link>
    <description>Polyurethane foam was treated as a plastic product falling within the concessional tax entry under the Tamil Nadu VAT notification, so the reduced rate applied. Because the assessment orders did not give effect to the advance ruling clarification on classification, they could not be sustained and were set aside, with directions to redo the assessments in conformity with that clarification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 12:18:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 546 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334528</link>
      <description>Polyurethane foam was treated as a plastic product falling within the concessional tax entry under the Tamil Nadu VAT notification, so the reduced rate applied. Because the assessment orders did not give effect to the advance ruling clarification on classification, they could not be sustained and were set aside, with directions to redo the assessments in conformity with that clarification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334528</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>