<?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 (9) TMI 593 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347836</link>
    <description>Recurring sales of unserviceable aircraft, scrap, spare parts and other material by an air transportation company raised the question whether such transactions constituted taxable business under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975. The court noted that the earlier view on the dominant activity test had been applied in a road transport context and involved a statutory corporation, whereas the present assessee was a company with regular sales of scrap and unserviceable assets. Because this raised a substantial issue on the scope of &quot;business&quot; under Section 2(c)(ii) and the continuing correctness of the earlier precedent, the matter was referred to a Full Bench for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2018 10:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=489044" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 593 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347836</link>
      <description>Recurring sales of unserviceable aircraft, scrap, spare parts and other material by an air transportation company raised the question whether such transactions constituted taxable business under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975. The court noted that the earlier view on the dominant activity test had been applied in a road transport context and involved a statutory corporation, whereas the present assessee was a company with regular sales of scrap and unserviceable assets. Because this raised a substantial issue on the scope of &quot;business&quot; under Section 2(c)(ii) and the continuing correctness of the earlier precedent, the matter was referred to a Full Bench for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347836</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>