<?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>1956 (4) TMI 51 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127656</link>
    <description>In a best judgment assessment, unexplained despatches supported by forwarding notes, despatch registers and employee signatures may be treated as sales where the assessee produces no genuine accounts or material to show that the consignments were made for others or were exempt. On that basis, the jute despatches were correctly brought to sales tax, and the gunny bag despatches were also rightly treated as business sales because no accounts distinguished them from Government supplies. The penalty for failure to apply for registration under section 13(5) was upheld, as no prior penalty was proved and the objection was not raised before the taxing authorities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:57:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164531" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1956 (4) TMI 51 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127656</link>
      <description>In a best judgment assessment, unexplained despatches supported by forwarding notes, despatch registers and employee signatures may be treated as sales where the assessee produces no genuine accounts or material to show that the consignments were made for others or were exempt. On that basis, the jute despatches were correctly brought to sales tax, and the gunny bag despatches were also rightly treated as business sales because no accounts distinguished them from Government supplies. The penalty for failure to apply for registration under section 13(5) was upheld, as no prior penalty was proved and the objection was not raised before the taxing authorities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127656</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>