<?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>2018 (1) TMI 1252 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354516</link>
    <description>Ink jet cartridges and toner cartridges were treated as parts and accessories of a printer, which the Court regarded as a peripheral of a computer system. Applying the earlier binding view, it held that where such items are not specifically enumerated, they follow the tax treatment of the principal goods to which they are attached and cannot be moved to a residuary entry merely by describing them as consumables. The statutory scheme and the notification relied on by the revenue did not justify a higher classification, so the classification issue was answered in favour of the assessee and the disputed turnover was not liable to the higher rate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2018 08:02:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=506678" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 1252 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354516</link>
      <description>Ink jet cartridges and toner cartridges were treated as parts and accessories of a printer, which the Court regarded as a peripheral of a computer system. Applying the earlier binding view, it held that where such items are not specifically enumerated, they follow the tax treatment of the principal goods to which they are attached and cannot be moved to a residuary entry merely by describing them as consumables. The statutory scheme and the notification relied on by the revenue did not justify a higher classification, so the classification issue was answered in favour of the assessee and the disputed turnover was not liable to the higher rate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354516</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>