<?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>2019 (5) TMI 363 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379635</link>
    <description>Rule 11(XII) of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1975 was construed to cover Delhi distribution companies engaged in electricity transmission and distribution, because &quot;undertaking&quot; was understood in its ordinary commercial sense and not as limited to a Government establishment. After the Electricity Act, 2003 replaced the earlier licensing framework, the rule was read contextually with the successor regime and transfer scheme, so the reference to a licence or sanction under the 1910 Act continued to operate for the corresponding successor entities. Sales to those companies therefore remained deductible from taxable turnover, and the contrary revenue objection failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 May 2019 06:56:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=569850" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 363 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379635</link>
      <description>Rule 11(XII) of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1975 was construed to cover Delhi distribution companies engaged in electricity transmission and distribution, because &quot;undertaking&quot; was understood in its ordinary commercial sense and not as limited to a Government establishment. After the Electricity Act, 2003 replaced the earlier licensing framework, the rule was read contextually with the successor regime and transfer scheme, so the reference to a licence or sanction under the 1910 Act continued to operate for the corresponding successor entities. Sales to those companies therefore remained deductible from taxable turnover, and the contrary revenue objection failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379635</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>