<?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 (5) TMI 1609 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274796</link>
    <description>Purchase of horn meal and hoof meal for export qualified for exemption under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 where the purchases were made against a pre-existing export arrangement and the goods were actually exported. The intervening process relied on by the Revenue did not break the essential export nexus or change the character of the transaction as one in the course of export. The contention that the commodity was not manure was treated as a factual issue and did not displace the appellate findings establishing the statutory exemption. The dealer was therefore entitled to exemption, and the revision petitions failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2018 13:01:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=533114" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 1609 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274796</link>
      <description>Purchase of horn meal and hoof meal for export qualified for exemption under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 where the purchases were made against a pre-existing export arrangement and the goods were actually exported. The intervening process relied on by the Revenue did not break the essential export nexus or change the character of the transaction as one in the course of export. The contention that the commodity was not manure was treated as a factual issue and did not displace the appellate findings establishing the statutory exemption. The dealer was therefore entitled to exemption, and the revision petitions failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274796</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>