<?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>1983 (3) TMI 250 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154173</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in a tax dispute involving the inclusion of sawing charges in the taxable turnover of timber and tiles dealers. The Court found the explanations provided by the assessee credible and detailed, leading to the deletion of the added amounts by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Court ruled that sawing charges were post-sale charges and should not be included in the turnover, contrary to the Board of Revenue&#039;s assertion. The Court set aside the Board of Revenue&#039;s order and affirmed the Appellate Assistant Commissioner&#039;s decision, emphasizing the thorough examination of discrepancies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2013 17:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171206" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (3) TMI 250 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154173</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in a tax dispute involving the inclusion of sawing charges in the taxable turnover of timber and tiles dealers. The Court found the explanations provided by the assessee credible and detailed, leading to the deletion of the added amounts by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Court ruled that sawing charges were post-sale charges and should not be included in the turnover, contrary to the Board of Revenue&#039;s assertion. The Court set aside the Board of Revenue&#039;s order and affirmed the Appellate Assistant Commissioner&#039;s decision, emphasizing the thorough examination of discrepancies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154173</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>