<?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>1985 (11) TMI 213 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154508</link>
    <description>Concessional Central Sales Tax on inter-State sales is available only on strict compliance with the statutory requirement of furnishing Form C in the prescribed manner. Where the original declaration is lost, the rules require the dealer to follow the specific procedure for producing the duplicate declaration; a photostat copy of the counterfoil retained by the purchasing dealer is not enough. The document states that this procedural substitute is exclusive, so the benefit cannot be granted unless the prescribed condition precedent is satisfied. On the material described, the Tribunal&#039;s acceptance of the photostat copy as sufficient was unjustified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Nov 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2013 17:47:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171539" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (11) TMI 213 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154508</link>
      <description>Concessional Central Sales Tax on inter-State sales is available only on strict compliance with the statutory requirement of furnishing Form C in the prescribed manner. Where the original declaration is lost, the rules require the dealer to follow the specific procedure for producing the duplicate declaration; a photostat copy of the counterfoil retained by the purchasing dealer is not enough. The document states that this procedural substitute is exclusive, so the benefit cannot be granted unless the prescribed condition precedent is satisfied. On the material described, the Tribunal&#039;s acceptance of the photostat copy as sufficient was unjustified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Nov 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154508</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>