Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 45 (0.67 seconds)The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956
Section 42 in Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Section 20 in Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
State Of Tamil Nadu vs Pyare Lal Malhotra Etc on 19 January, 1976
"....... As we understand the principle (of the Supreme Court in Pyare Lal Malhotra's case ), the enumeration of the several commodities in clause (iv) must be regarded as each having a separate identity of its own; different items brought together under a single sub-clause or sub-division cannot be regarded as one single type of commercial commodity having a single identity for the purpose of single point taxation.
Deccan Engineers vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 6 March, 1991
64. That is how the Division Bench in Deccan Engineers case [1992] 84 STC 92 interpreted the word "include" in sub-entry (ii) by holding that it cannot be said to extend to any commodity other than specified therein. We are not inclined to take a different view. However, we have dealt with the matter on the basis of what "cast iron" is and what things can be properly said to be "cast iron" and we have taken the view that "rough castings" which are not separate and distinct commercial commodities are also "cast iron" keeping in view the context in which the term "cast iron" occurs in item (iv).
The Central Excise Act, 1944
Adarsh Foundries And Ors. vs Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes, ... on 18 June, 1987
The counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on two Bench decisions of this Court reported in Munaga Singaraiah Sreshty and Sons v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1977] 40 STC 89 and Adarsh Foundries v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1988] 70 STC 151, on the effect of the Government instructions. In view of what we have pointed out above, the ratio of the said decisions does not apply to the present case. Therefore, neither the letters of the Government of India nor the G.O., issued by the State Government help in resolving the controversy in this case."