<?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 (10) TMI 948 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349793</link>
    <description>Dilution of cold drink concentrate by adding water and gas to produce aerated drinks was treated as manufacture under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 because the statutory definition is broad and covers processing, adapting and altering goods. The court applied the commercial identity and common parlance tests and found that the finished aerated drink was a distinct commodity, not synonymous with the original concentrate. Authorities cited by the revisionist were distinguished on the ground that they involved situations where no separate commercial product emerged. The Tribunal&#039;s view was therefore upheld and the revisions were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2018 14:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=493472" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 948 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349793</link>
      <description>Dilution of cold drink concentrate by adding water and gas to produce aerated drinks was treated as manufacture under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 because the statutory definition is broad and covers processing, adapting and altering goods. The court applied the commercial identity and common parlance tests and found that the finished aerated drink was a distinct commodity, not synonymous with the original concentrate. Authorities cited by the revisionist were distinguished on the ground that they involved situations where no separate commercial product emerged. The Tribunal&#039;s view was therefore upheld and the revisions were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349793</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>