https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127089 Rule 36(1) of the Bihar Sales Tax Rules was upheld as a valid evidentiary provision because it regulates proof of tax-free sales without altering the taxability of goods under Sections 6 and 10 of the Act. The rule was treated as mandatory for a dealer claiming deduction or exemption from gross turnover, so compliance could not be treated as optional. The award of costs by the Board and subordinate sales tax authorities was held unlawful because the Act confers no general power to award costs on those authorities and such power cannot be implied for a statutory tribunal of limited jurisdiction. en-us Tue, 28 Sep 1948 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:44:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127089 Rule 36(1) of the Bihar Sales Tax Rules was upheld as a valid evidentiary provision because it regulates proof of tax-free sales without altering the taxability of goods under Sections 6 and 10 of the Act. The rule was treated as mandatory for a dealer claiming deduction or exemption from gross turnover, so compliance could not be treated as optional. The award of costs by the Board and subordinate sales tax authorities was held unlawful because the Act confers no general power to award costs on those authorities and such power cannot be implied for a statutory tribunal of limited jurisdiction. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 28 Sep 1948 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127089