<?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>1993 (1) TMI 274 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157501</link>
    <description>In a reassessment under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, the Tribunal&#039;s rejection of a mandi samiti certificate and related evidence concerning mandi fee payment was found unsustainable because the material was not examined in its proper context. The certificate indicated that the payment represented the balance of the year 1982-83, yet the Tribunal discarded it on a broad assumption that yearly mandi fee details could not relate to the relevant financial year. As the final fact-finding authority, the Tribunal was required to consider all relevant evidence judicially, and the turnover addition based on that inference required fresh reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:18:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174524" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (1) TMI 274 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157501</link>
      <description>In a reassessment under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, the Tribunal&#039;s rejection of a mandi samiti certificate and related evidence concerning mandi fee payment was found unsustainable because the material was not examined in its proper context. The certificate indicated that the payment represented the balance of the year 1982-83, yet the Tribunal discarded it on a broad assumption that yearly mandi fee details could not relate to the relevant financial year. As the final fact-finding authority, the Tribunal was required to consider all relevant evidence judicially, and the turnover addition based on that inference required fresh reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157501</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>