<?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 (11) TMI 4 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387755</link>
    <description>Crankshafts and camshafts used in refrigerator compressors were discussed for classification under the Uttar Pradesh VAT Act, with the focus on whether Entry 26 of Schedule-II Part-A covered them as machinery, equipment, apparatus, tools, moulds, dies, or component parts and accessories. The analysis states that tax classification must be determined first by the specific taxing entry, and only then by the residuary entry if the specific provision does not apply. It further notes that the definition of capital goods in Section 2(f) does not itself control tax rate or classification. The Tribunal&#039;s reliance on that definition was therefore legally irrelevant, and the matter was remitted for fresh decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2020 11:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=592608" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 4 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387755</link>
      <description>Crankshafts and camshafts used in refrigerator compressors were discussed for classification under the Uttar Pradesh VAT Act, with the focus on whether Entry 26 of Schedule-II Part-A covered them as machinery, equipment, apparatus, tools, moulds, dies, or component parts and accessories. The analysis states that tax classification must be determined first by the specific taxing entry, and only then by the residuary entry if the specific provision does not apply. It further notes that the definition of capital goods in Section 2(f) does not itself control tax rate or classification. The Tribunal&#039;s reliance on that definition was therefore legally irrelevant, and the matter was remitted for fresh decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387755</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>