<?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>1986 (9) TMI 398 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155087</link>
    <description>Under section 15-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, penalty for concealment of turnover is computed by reference to the tax difference between the returned turnover and the assessed turnover, not merely the actual concealment separately detected. The amended wording was read as a deliberate departure from the earlier scheme, extending to cases involving false accounts or false declarations even where turnover figures themselves do not change. The expression &quot;avoided&quot; was treated as covering both escaped and evaded tax, and &quot;thereby&quot; was read broadly enough to include concealment leading to best judgment assessment. The issue was answered against the assessee and in favour of the department.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Aug 2013 13:11:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172118" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (9) TMI 398 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155087</link>
      <description>Under section 15-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, penalty for concealment of turnover is computed by reference to the tax difference between the returned turnover and the assessed turnover, not merely the actual concealment separately detected. The amended wording was read as a deliberate departure from the earlier scheme, extending to cases involving false accounts or false declarations even where turnover figures themselves do not change. The expression &quot;avoided&quot; was treated as covering both escaped and evaded tax, and &quot;thereby&quot; was read broadly enough to include concealment leading to best judgment assessment. The issue was answered against the assessee and in favour of the department.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155087</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>