<?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>1972 (10) TMI 108 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150383</link>
    <description>Escaped-turnover reassessment under section 12(8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act was explained as permissible even where the suppression material was already available at the original assessment stage but was not acted upon; prior non-utilisation of that material is not a legal bar to reopening. The text also states that an isolated iron-goods transaction may still fall within turnover if the statutory definition covers casual dealing, and that the character of the transaction depends on intention, nature and surrounding circumstances rather than on the number of transactions alone. The reference was described as being answered in favour of the taxing department.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 11:08:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167424" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (10) TMI 108 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150383</link>
      <description>Escaped-turnover reassessment under section 12(8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act was explained as permissible even where the suppression material was already available at the original assessment stage but was not acted upon; prior non-utilisation of that material is not a legal bar to reopening. The text also states that an isolated iron-goods transaction may still fall within turnover if the statutory definition covers casual dealing, and that the character of the transaction depends on intention, nature and surrounding circumstances rather than on the number of transactions alone. The reference was described as being answered in favour of the taxing department.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150383</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>