<?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>1990 (7) TMI 321 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155918</link>
    <description>Section 41 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 authorises seizure and retention of accounts, registers and documents for examination, inquiry or proceedings, and that retention continues so long as it is necessary for those purposes. Fairness nevertheless requires that a dealer whose records are seized be given a meaningful opportunity to know their contents and meet any discrepancy in the proceedings. That access may be provided by return of the documents, inspection in exceptional cases, or supply of copies at the dealer&#039;s cost. On that basis, the dealer was entitled to have the seized documents photographed or xeroxed at his own expense.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Sep 2013 18:15:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172945" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (7) TMI 321 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155918</link>
      <description>Section 41 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 authorises seizure and retention of accounts, registers and documents for examination, inquiry or proceedings, and that retention continues so long as it is necessary for those purposes. Fairness nevertheless requires that a dealer whose records are seized be given a meaningful opportunity to know their contents and meet any discrepancy in the proceedings. That access may be provided by return of the documents, inspection in exceptional cases, or supply of copies at the dealer&#039;s cost. On that basis, the dealer was entitled to have the seized documents photographed or xeroxed at his own expense.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>