<?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 (7) TMI 293 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154246</link>
    <description>A return is not false where the dealer has fully and correctly disclosed the turnover and only advances an untenable legal claim for exemption. False return requires a false statement of fact; an unsustainable legal plea, even if previously rejected, does not change the truthful character of the factual disclosure. On that basis, penalty was not leviable under section 43(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, and the penalty orders were not sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2013 16:13:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171279" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (7) TMI 293 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154246</link>
      <description>A return is not false where the dealer has fully and correctly disclosed the turnover and only advances an untenable legal claim for exemption. False return requires a false statement of fact; an unsustainable legal plea, even if previously rejected, does not change the truthful character of the factual disclosure. On that basis, penalty was not leviable under section 43(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, and the penalty orders were not sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154246</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>