<?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>1976 (1) TMI 160 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151152</link>
    <description>A dealer&#039;s duty under the Bombay Sales Tax Act was held to be only to preserve prescribed records for the statutory period, not to treat expiry of that period as a ground to withhold evidence needed to support a deduction claim. Where documents and declarations were not produced during pending original assessment proceedings, the assessee still bore the burden of proving entitlement to deduction, and the taxing authority could insist on production on demand. The court also noted that assessment proceedings begin with filing of returns and that records should ordinarily be retained until the assessment, appeal, or revision arising from it is finally concluded. The deduction claim was therefore not automatically acceptable merely because the retention period had expired.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 May 2013 16:26:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (1) TMI 160 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151152</link>
      <description>A dealer&#039;s duty under the Bombay Sales Tax Act was held to be only to preserve prescribed records for the statutory period, not to treat expiry of that period as a ground to withhold evidence needed to support a deduction claim. Where documents and declarations were not produced during pending original assessment proceedings, the assessee still bore the burden of proving entitlement to deduction, and the taxing authority could insist on production on demand. The court also noted that assessment proceedings begin with filing of returns and that records should ordinarily be retained until the assessment, appeal, or revision arising from it is finally concluded. The deduction claim was therefore not automatically acceptable merely because the retention period had expired.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151152</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>