<?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>1977 (3) TMI 56 - ITAT GWALIOR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65865</link>
    <description>Penalty for turnover discrepancies under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act was unsustainable where the differences between returns and accounts were reasonably explained as classification and accounting errors rather than deliberate suppression. For 1966-67, the mismatch was attributed to tax-paid sales and sales tax collected items not shown in the returns, and no guilty intention to evade tax was found; the penalty was set aside. For 1967-68, the discrepancy was explained by adhat sales and the absence of the munim, with no evidence of intentional concealment; the penalty was also annulled. The assessee&#039;s explanations should have been accepted on the facts found.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:11:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=104301" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (3) TMI 56 - ITAT GWALIOR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65865</link>
      <description>Penalty for turnover discrepancies under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act was unsustainable where the differences between returns and accounts were reasonably explained as classification and accounting errors rather than deliberate suppression. For 1966-67, the mismatch was attributed to tax-paid sales and sales tax collected items not shown in the returns, and no guilty intention to evade tax was found; the penalty was set aside. For 1967-68, the discrepancy was explained by adhat sales and the absence of the munim, with no evidence of intentional concealment; the penalty was also annulled. The assessee&#039;s explanations should have been accepted on the facts found.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65865</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>