<?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 (9) TMI 331 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157127</link>
    <description>Purchase tax remained payable on black gram bought from cultivators because liability arose on the purchase transaction itself, but amounts collected at the check gate as a protective anti-evasion measure were not a second levy and could be adjusted against the dealer&#039;s admitted tax liability. The adjustment under Rule 36 was not confined to tax paid personally by the dealer, and check-gate receipts could satisfy the certification requirement. The absence of the purchase turnover in the original return did not defeat adjustment where the purchases were otherwise established, reducing the balance demand accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2013 15:18:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174152" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (9) TMI 331 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157127</link>
      <description>Purchase tax remained payable on black gram bought from cultivators because liability arose on the purchase transaction itself, but amounts collected at the check gate as a protective anti-evasion measure were not a second levy and could be adjusted against the dealer&#039;s admitted tax liability. The adjustment under Rule 36 was not confined to tax paid personally by the dealer, and check-gate receipts could satisfy the certification requirement. The absence of the purchase turnover in the original return did not defeat adjustment where the purchases were otherwise established, reducing the balance demand accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157127</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>