https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241823 Non-use of a vehicle and alleged theft of the permit did not, on the stated record, justify quashing the passenger tax and additional tax demand under the Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1997. The pleadings and surrender application did not disclose theft or loss, and no FIR or comparable proof was produced to support the exemption plea. The appellate authority was entitled to hold that surrender for non-use required compliance with the statutory conditions, including production of the relevant documents, and those conditions were not met. The statute also contemplated refund only where the prescribed conditions were established, so no interference with the demand or appellate order was warranted. en-us Thu, 01 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jan 2014 12:54:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241823 Non-use of a vehicle and alleged theft of the permit did not, on the stated record, justify quashing the passenger tax and additional tax demand under the Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1997. The pleadings and surrender application did not disclose theft or loss, and no FIR or comparable proof was produced to support the exemption plea. The appellate authority was entitled to hold that surrender for non-use required compliance with the statutory conditions, including production of the relevant documents, and those conditions were not met. The statute also contemplated refund only where the prescribed conditions were established, so no interference with the demand or appellate order was warranted. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 01 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241823