<?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>1959 (9) TMI 30 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127781</link>
    <description>Escaped turnover could be reassessed under rule 17(1) if notice was issued within the statutory two-year period following the assessment year; the shorter period was not treated as a separate bar, so limitation did not invalidate the reassessment. Taxability of the disputed sugar-cane sales depended on whether the petitioners were dealers under the Act. Sales of agricultural produce alone did not establish dealer status, and the unresolved transactions involving non-proved leased lands and benami dealings required further evidence. The Tribunal&#039;s findings on owned and proved leased lands were accepted, but the remaining issue was remanded for fresh determination of dealer status in relation to the disputed sales.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Mar 2013 15:28:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164656" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1959 (9) TMI 30 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127781</link>
      <description>Escaped turnover could be reassessed under rule 17(1) if notice was issued within the statutory two-year period following the assessment year; the shorter period was not treated as a separate bar, so limitation did not invalidate the reassessment. Taxability of the disputed sugar-cane sales depended on whether the petitioners were dealers under the Act. Sales of agricultural produce alone did not establish dealer status, and the unresolved transactions involving non-proved leased lands and benami dealings required further evidence. The Tribunal&#039;s findings on owned and proved leased lands were accepted, but the remaining issue was remanded for fresh determination of dealer status in relation to the disputed sales.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127781</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>