<?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 (9) TMI 1597 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298021</link>
    <description>A financier that repossesses and sells hypothecated vehicles on default was treated as a dealer under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act because the definitions of dealer, sale and turnover were wide enough to cover the independent disposal of the vehicles. The reasoning followed HDFC Bank Ltd., which was held to apply where the financier exercised a contractual right to sell without the borrower&#039;s active participation. Liability was not avoided by describing the arrangement as agency, because tax attached to the turnover arising from the sale itself. The assessment sustaining tax on repossessed vehicle sales was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Oct 2021 20:03:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=657762" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 1597 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298021</link>
      <description>A financier that repossesses and sells hypothecated vehicles on default was treated as a dealer under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act because the definitions of dealer, sale and turnover were wide enough to cover the independent disposal of the vehicles. The reasoning followed HDFC Bank Ltd., which was held to apply where the financier exercised a contractual right to sell without the borrower&#039;s active participation. Liability was not avoided by describing the arrangement as agency, because tax attached to the turnover arising from the sale itself. The assessment sustaining tax on repossessed vehicle sales was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298021</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>