<?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>1996 (4) TMI 450 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158219</link>
    <description>Tax on dressed chicken could not be sustained under retrospectively inserted Entry No. 114 for meat kept in cold storage because the department failed to prove the necessary factual basis for that classification during the relevant assessment year. The assessment and appellate orders were founded on an inspection made long after the year in question, and the authorities relied on inference rather than evidence that the goods actually answered the taxing entry. As the assessee consistently dealt in dressed chicken and the exemption position for that period remained applicable, the addition to assessable turnover was held unsustainable and the revision was dismissed in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Oct 2013 12:53:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=330161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (4) TMI 450 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158219</link>
      <description>Tax on dressed chicken could not be sustained under retrospectively inserted Entry No. 114 for meat kept in cold storage because the department failed to prove the necessary factual basis for that classification during the relevant assessment year. The assessment and appellate orders were founded on an inspection made long after the year in question, and the authorities relied on inference rather than evidence that the goods actually answered the taxing entry. As the assessee consistently dealt in dressed chicken and the exemption position for that period remained applicable, the addition to assessable turnover was held unsustainable and the revision was dismissed in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158219</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>