<?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>1995 (9) TMI 367 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159428</link>
    <description>Revision under section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was held not to disclose any real question of law, because the Tribunal&#039;s concurrent factual findings showed that slips and pocket note-books contained entries evidencing clandestine sales of chappals and suppressed turnover. The assessing authority had examined those materials in detail, and the challenge effectively sought reappreciation of facts rather than correction of a legal infirmity. The objection that third-party verification should have been obtained was rejected, as no prior effort had been made to produce or seek examination of those persons before the assessing authority. The best judgment assessment and additions based on suppression material were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Sep 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2013 12:53:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=336990" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (9) TMI 367 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159428</link>
      <description>Revision under section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was held not to disclose any real question of law, because the Tribunal&#039;s concurrent factual findings showed that slips and pocket note-books contained entries evidencing clandestine sales of chappals and suppressed turnover. The assessing authority had examined those materials in detail, and the challenge effectively sought reappreciation of facts rather than correction of a legal infirmity. The objection that third-party verification should have been obtained was rejected, as no prior effort had been made to produce or seek examination of those persons before the assessing authority. The best judgment assessment and additions based on suppression material were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Sep 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159428</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>