<?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>2017 (2) TMI 468 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338768</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the appellant, dismissing the revenue&#039;s petitions regarding the classification of &quot;piston rings&quot; for tax purposes under the Central Sales Tax (CST) Act and the Karnataka Value Added Tax (KVAT) Act. The Court held that the &quot;piston rings&quot; should be classified under Section 14(iv)(viii) of the CST Act, emphasizing their similarity to iron rings and their inclusion in the category of wheels specified by the Act. The Court&#039;s decision was based on a detailed analysis of relevant provisions and precedents, highlighting the failure of the revenue to provide evidence to challenge established legal interpretations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2018 11:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458268" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 468 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338768</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the appellant, dismissing the revenue&#039;s petitions regarding the classification of &quot;piston rings&quot; for tax purposes under the Central Sales Tax (CST) Act and the Karnataka Value Added Tax (KVAT) Act. The Court held that the &quot;piston rings&quot; should be classified under Section 14(iv)(viii) of the CST Act, emphasizing their similarity to iron rings and their inclusion in the category of wheels specified by the Act. The Court&#039;s decision was based on a detailed analysis of relevant provisions and precedents, highlighting the failure of the revenue to provide evidence to challenge established legal interpretations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338768</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>