<?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>1973 (5) TMI 91 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150696</link>
    <description>Penalty under a provision like section 12(3) was held inapplicable where the assessed turnover had been disclosed in the accounts and the assessment was made on book entries rather than best judgment. The revisional authority was justified in declining to entertain a fresh exemption claim based on works contracts when no such plea had been raised before the assessing authority, no appeal had been filed against the assessment, and the assessee had already accepted the turnover for assessment and paid tax on it. The result was that the penalty point favoured the assessee, while the revision point favoured the revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 May 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 14:45:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167736" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1973 (5) TMI 91 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150696</link>
      <description>Penalty under a provision like section 12(3) was held inapplicable where the assessed turnover had been disclosed in the accounts and the assessment was made on book entries rather than best judgment. The revisional authority was justified in declining to entertain a fresh exemption claim based on works contracts when no such plea had been raised before the assessing authority, no appeal had been filed against the assessment, and the assessee had already accepted the turnover for assessment and paid tax on it. The result was that the penalty point favoured the assessee, while the revision point favoured the revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 May 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150696</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>