<?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>1952 (1) TMI 11 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127164</link>
    <description>Tax liability under the relevant turnover provision did not arise for the period up to 30 June 1945 because liability under the governing sub-section commenced only three months after the start of the year following the year in which turnover first crossed the statutory limit; &quot;year&quot; was treated as the financial year. The revisional power was wide enough to extend to questions of fact, but the refusal to interfere was upheld because it was exercised judicially on the basis of concurrent findings and the assessee&#039;s failure to maintain books and produce accounts. The reference was answered partly for the assessee and partly against it.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 1952 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:23:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164042" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1952 (1) TMI 11 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127164</link>
      <description>Tax liability under the relevant turnover provision did not arise for the period up to 30 June 1945 because liability under the governing sub-section commenced only three months after the start of the year following the year in which turnover first crossed the statutory limit; &quot;year&quot; was treated as the financial year. The revisional power was wide enough to extend to questions of fact, but the refusal to interfere was upheld because it was exercised judicially on the basis of concurrent findings and the assessee&#039;s failure to maintain books and produce accounts. The reference was answered partly for the assessee and partly against it.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 1952 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127164</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>