<?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>1975 (12) TMI 151 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151132</link>
    <description>Taxable liability arose when the purchase transactions occurred, so a later exemption notification could not apply to earlier completed purchases absent express retrospective effect; the exemption was therefore unavailable. The assessing authority was also justified in rejecting unreliable accounts where no gum consumption records were kept, and a best judgment estimate of consumption was upheld because the estimate was supported by comparable material and was not arbitrary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 17:12:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168171" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (12) TMI 151 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151132</link>
      <description>Taxable liability arose when the purchase transactions occurred, so a later exemption notification could not apply to earlier completed purchases absent express retrospective effect; the exemption was therefore unavailable. The assessing authority was also justified in rejecting unreliable accounts where no gum consumption records were kept, and a best judgment estimate of consumption was upheld because the estimate was supported by comparable material and was not arbitrary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151132</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>