<?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>2026 (3) TMI 1510 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788755</link>
    <description>An auction sale of timber concluded before the GST regime remained governed by the auction terms fixing tax and interest obligations. The buyer had agreed to pay the balance price with the then applicable tax, and the later commencement of GST did not alter the tax liability already attached to the completed contract. Section 64-A of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 was unavailable because it applies only where the contract does not show a different intention; here, the auction conditions expressly allocated tax liability and delayed-payment interest. The purchaser therefore could not shift the burden to the Maharashtra GST regime, and the contractual tax obligations continued to bind the parties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2026 08:52:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=893203" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 1510 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788755</link>
      <description>An auction sale of timber concluded before the GST regime remained governed by the auction terms fixing tax and interest obligations. The buyer had agreed to pay the balance price with the then applicable tax, and the later commencement of GST did not alter the tax liability already attached to the completed contract. Section 64-A of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 was unavailable because it applies only where the contract does not show a different intention; here, the auction conditions expressly allocated tax liability and delayed-payment interest. The purchaser therefore could not shift the burden to the Maharashtra GST regime, and the contractual tax obligations continued to bind the parties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788755</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>