<?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>1948 (4) TMI 1 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127092</link>
    <description>A person who merely brings buyer and seller together and earns commission is not a dealer, but where he receives goods without the owner, stores them, fixes prices, sells them, collects payment and accounts to the owners, those transactions amount to sales by him and satisfy the definition of dealer. In quasi-criminal tax penalty proceedings, the prosecution must first establish a prima facie turnover; once assessment records and transaction chittas showed turnover above the statutory threshold, the burden shifted to the assessee to rebut it, and failure to do so sustained liability. The conviction was maintained, though the sentence was reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 1948 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:56:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163970" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1948 (4) TMI 1 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127092</link>
      <description>A person who merely brings buyer and seller together and earns commission is not a dealer, but where he receives goods without the owner, stores them, fixes prices, sells them, collects payment and accounts to the owners, those transactions amount to sales by him and satisfy the definition of dealer. In quasi-criminal tax penalty proceedings, the prosecution must first establish a prima facie turnover; once assessment records and transaction chittas showed turnover above the statutory threshold, the burden shifted to the assessee to rebut it, and failure to do so sustained liability. The conviction was maintained, though the sentence was reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 1948 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127092</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>