<?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>2013 (11) TMI 460 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239283</link>
    <description>Where stock variation found on inspection was later brought into the accounts, an equal addition to turnover was unwarranted. The first appellate authority&#039;s view that the actual suppression alone sufficiently covered probable omission was held to be just and reasonable. The revisional authority could not enhance the turnover artificially merely to push it above the threshold for additional sales tax, and the enhancement was not sustained. The assessee was entitled to relief from the revised assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335092" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 460 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239283</link>
      <description>Where stock variation found on inspection was later brought into the accounts, an equal addition to turnover was unwarranted. The first appellate authority&#039;s view that the actual suppression alone sufficiently covered probable omission was held to be just and reasonable. The revisional authority could not enhance the turnover artificially merely to push it above the threshold for additional sales tax, and the enhancement was not sustained. The assessee was entitled to relief from the revised assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239283</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>