<?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>1999 (2) TMI 636 - TAMIL NADU TAXATION SPECIAL TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159757</link>
    <description>A transit-pass deeming scheme under section 44-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 was treated as a valid machinery provision to prevent evasion of tax on goods in transit. The deemed-sale presumption was upheld as falling within the State&#039;s taxing power and not conflicting with the Central Sales Tax Act, because it remained rebuttable in assessment proceedings and allowed notice and opportunity to show the actual movement and disposal of goods. Belated or omitted surrender of the transit pass did not by itself establish tax evasion for every penal consequence; compounding depended on whether the facts showed technical default or deliberate avoidance of check-post requirements.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Nov 2013 16:55:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337764" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (2) TMI 636 - TAMIL NADU TAXATION SPECIAL TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159757</link>
      <description>A transit-pass deeming scheme under section 44-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 was treated as a valid machinery provision to prevent evasion of tax on goods in transit. The deemed-sale presumption was upheld as falling within the State&#039;s taxing power and not conflicting with the Central Sales Tax Act, because it remained rebuttable in assessment proceedings and allowed notice and opportunity to show the actual movement and disposal of goods. Belated or omitted surrender of the transit pass did not by itself establish tax evasion for every penal consequence; compounding depended on whether the facts showed technical default or deliberate avoidance of check-post requirements.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159757</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>