<?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>1976 (3) TMI 240 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190280</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court of India applied the statutory definition of oil-seeds under section 14(vi) of the Central Sales Tax Act and held that jeera, dhania, panmohuri, methi and postak fell within that category. It accepted that the definition must be applied on its terms, with regard to the oil-yielding characteristics and use of the commodities, rather than by a narrow popular label. The Court also held that the Government of India communication dated 31 January 1958 had no statutory force and was not binding as law, but it could properly be used as relevant evidence of the nature and use of the goods. The appeals therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458233" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (3) TMI 240 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190280</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court of India applied the statutory definition of oil-seeds under section 14(vi) of the Central Sales Tax Act and held that jeera, dhania, panmohuri, methi and postak fell within that category. It accepted that the definition must be applied on its terms, with regard to the oil-yielding characteristics and use of the commodities, rather than by a narrow popular label. The Court also held that the Government of India communication dated 31 January 1958 had no statutory force and was not binding as law, but it could properly be used as relevant evidence of the nature and use of the goods. The appeals therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190280</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>