<?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>2001 (9) TMI 1110 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161287</link>
    <description>A penultimate sale of chillies in the course of export did not prevent levy of purchase tax on the earlier local purchase from non-dealers under the State purchase-tax provision, and the absence of an express export exemption did not defeat that liability. The assessee also failed to prove export of jaggery because the record lacked supporting documents such as a bill of lading or Form H, so tax on that turnover was upheld. Penalty for alleged suppression was not sustained mechanically on the basis of tax liability alone; the assessee&#039;s bona fides and disclosure of turnover had to be examined, so the penalty was set aside and remitted for fresh consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jan 2014 17:10:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342504" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (9) TMI 1110 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161287</link>
      <description>A penultimate sale of chillies in the course of export did not prevent levy of purchase tax on the earlier local purchase from non-dealers under the State purchase-tax provision, and the absence of an express export exemption did not defeat that liability. The assessee also failed to prove export of jaggery because the record lacked supporting documents such as a bill of lading or Form H, so tax on that turnover was upheld. Penalty for alleged suppression was not sustained mechanically on the basis of tax liability alone; the assessee&#039;s bona fides and disclosure of turnover had to be examined, so the penalty was set aside and remitted for fresh consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161287</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>