<?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>1962 (11) TMI 32 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128719</link>
    <description>Accommodation sales may be excluded from taxable turnover only when the dealer procures goods for a specific customer, sells them immediately, records the transaction contemporaneously as an accommodation sale with disclosure of the source dealer, and makes no profit. On the facts accepted by the Tribunal, those conditions were satisfied: the goods were obtained from the Bombay dealer for the customer, cleared on arrival, and the accounts substantially reflected the transactions as accommodation sales. The contrary inference from the C Form certificates was insufficient to displace the factual finding, which was supported by the record. The disputed turnover was therefore rightly excluded, and the revision petition failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:57:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165588" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (11) TMI 32 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128719</link>
      <description>Accommodation sales may be excluded from taxable turnover only when the dealer procures goods for a specific customer, sells them immediately, records the transaction contemporaneously as an accommodation sale with disclosure of the source dealer, and makes no profit. On the facts accepted by the Tribunal, those conditions were satisfied: the goods were obtained from the Bombay dealer for the customer, cleared on arrival, and the accounts substantially reflected the transactions as accommodation sales. The contrary inference from the C Form certificates was insufficient to displace the factual finding, which was supported by the record. The disputed turnover was therefore rightly excluded, and the revision petition failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128719</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>