https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127615 Section 12-C(1) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was construed as giving an appeal only from revisional orders passed suo motu under section 12(3), not from revisions moved by an assessee under section 12(3)(ii); the appellate remedy was therefore unavailable for such orders. On supervisory review under Article 227, contemporaneous admissions at the time of seizure were treated as sufficient material to support the finding that the seized books belonged to the firm, and the turnover estimate based on those books was upheld where the regular accounts did not disclose the full business. No jurisdictional error or failure of justice was shown. en-us Fri, 26 Apr 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Mar 2013 10:36:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127615 Section 12-C(1) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was construed as giving an appeal only from revisional orders passed suo motu under section 12(3), not from revisions moved by an assessee under section 12(3)(ii); the appellate remedy was therefore unavailable for such orders. On supervisory review under Article 227, contemporaneous admissions at the time of seizure were treated as sufficient material to support the finding that the seized books belonged to the firm, and the turnover estimate based on those books was upheld where the regular accounts did not disclose the full business. No jurisdictional error or failure of justice was shown. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 26 Apr 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127615