<?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>1968 (3) TMI 103 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148534</link>
    <description>Rule 25 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 allows deduction for groundnut or kernel value only where the oil sold forms part of the dealer&#039;s turnover, tax has been paid on that sale, and tax has also been paid on the relevant purchase. Exact correlation between the precise quantity of input purchased and the quantity of oil sold is not required; the dealer need only prove compliance with the rule&#039;s conditions through the accounts, and the formula applies by taking the lesser quantity shown in the accounts or worked out under the explanation. The burden of establishing entitlement remains on the dealer, and the Tribunal was incorrect in treating earlier consent-based decisions as governing principle.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:39:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166574" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (3) TMI 103 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148534</link>
      <description>Rule 25 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 allows deduction for groundnut or kernel value only where the oil sold forms part of the dealer&#039;s turnover, tax has been paid on that sale, and tax has also been paid on the relevant purchase. Exact correlation between the precise quantity of input purchased and the quantity of oil sold is not required; the dealer need only prove compliance with the rule&#039;s conditions through the accounts, and the formula applies by taking the lesser quantity shown in the accounts or worked out under the explanation. The burden of establishing entitlement remains on the dealer, and the Tribunal was incorrect in treating earlier consent-based decisions as governing principle.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Mar 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148534</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>