<?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>1977 (12) TMI 123 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152094</link>
    <description>Section 7-A of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act places the burden on the dealer to show that a sale or purchase is not liable to tax or is taxable at a reduced rate. The assessee discharged that burden by producing detailed purchase particulars, including seller details, bill numbers, dates, quantities and amounts, to support the claim that the goods were second sales. Once such primary material was furnished, the assessing authority was required to verify its correctness if it doubted the claim. Because no effective enquiry or rebuttal was made, the Board of Revenue&#039;s contrary view was held erroneous and the revisional assessment was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Jun 2013 15:58:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169132" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (12) TMI 123 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152094</link>
      <description>Section 7-A of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act places the burden on the dealer to show that a sale or purchase is not liable to tax or is taxable at a reduced rate. The assessee discharged that burden by producing detailed purchase particulars, including seller details, bill numbers, dates, quantities and amounts, to support the claim that the goods were second sales. Once such primary material was furnished, the assessing authority was required to verify its correctness if it doubted the claim. Because no effective enquiry or rebuttal was made, the Board of Revenue&#039;s contrary view was held erroneous and the revisional assessment was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152094</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>