https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87801 Section 7(5) of the Madhya Pradesh entry tax law was construed in the context of the Act's anti-evasion scheme: the presumption arising from failure to furnish the statement was held rebuttable, allowing the dealer to show absence of intent to facilitate evasion, and the assessing authority could impose a lesser penalty on the facts. The penalty described as ten times the entry tax was treated as only the maximum limit, not a compulsory fixed levy. On that construction, the provision was upheld and the objection that it was confiscatory was rejected. en-us Thu, 14 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Dec 2025 00:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87801 Section 7(5) of the Madhya Pradesh entry tax law was construed in the context of the Act's anti-evasion scheme: the presumption arising from failure to furnish the statement was held rebuttable, allowing the dealer to show absence of intent to facilitate evasion, and the assessing authority could impose a lesser penalty on the facts. The penalty described as ten times the entry tax was treated as only the maximum limit, not a compulsory fixed levy. On that construction, the provision was upheld and the objection that it was confiscatory was rejected. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Thu, 14 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87801