<?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 (8) TMI 185 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148663</link>
    <description>Where assessment records already contain the books and invoices relating to disputed turnover, an incorrect inclusion of amounts claimed as second sales in the course of inter-State movement may be treated as a rectifiable mistake. The document states that such transactions were said to fall within section 3(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and to be exempt under section 6(2), and that rectification under section 55 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was therefore available. The authority was directed to reconsider each transaction afresh on the evidence and determine whether the turnover was liable to be excluded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 16:44:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166703" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (8) TMI 185 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148663</link>
      <description>Where assessment records already contain the books and invoices relating to disputed turnover, an incorrect inclusion of amounts claimed as second sales in the course of inter-State movement may be treated as a rectifiable mistake. The document states that such transactions were said to fall within section 3(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and to be exempt under section 6(2), and that rectification under section 55 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was therefore available. The authority was directed to reconsider each transaction afresh on the evidence and determine whether the turnover was liable to be excluded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148663</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>