https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127403 Separate account maintenance under rule 12(3) was satisfied where the taxpayer kept distinct ledgers for commission agency business and personal dealings, even though both appeared in one chitta. The rule required separate accounts, not two separate account books, and the entries showed the transactions were identifiable and independently recorded. Omission to fill column 5 in some returns was immaterial because the returns still disclosed gross and net turnover. Cross-examination admissions did not override the documentary finding. On that basis, the taxpayer was held to have complied with rule 12(3) and remained entitled to the exemption and refund claimed. en-us Wed, 16 Feb 1955 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Mar 2013 14:43:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127403 Separate account maintenance under rule 12(3) was satisfied where the taxpayer kept distinct ledgers for commission agency business and personal dealings, even though both appeared in one chitta. The rule required separate accounts, not two separate account books, and the entries showed the transactions were identifiable and independently recorded. Omission to fill column 5 in some returns was immaterial because the returns still disclosed gross and net turnover. Cross-examination admissions did not override the documentary finding. On that basis, the taxpayer was held to have complied with rule 12(3) and remained entitled to the exemption and refund claimed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 16 Feb 1955 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127403