<?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>2014 (2) TMI 205 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243605</link>
    <description>Exchange of old television sets for new sets on payment of a differential amount was treated as a taxable sale within the wide definition under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994. Because the assessee failed to prove that the exchanged goods had already suffered tax and did not produce the relevant books or establish the credit-note transactions, purchase tax was held payable. Penalty was also upheld on the basis that the transactions were omitted from the books and return, the records were not produced even at the appellate stage, and the authorities found deliberate concealment. The revision therefore failed, with tax liability and concealment-based penalty both sustained on the facts found.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2014 06:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=344958" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 205 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243605</link>
      <description>Exchange of old television sets for new sets on payment of a differential amount was treated as a taxable sale within the wide definition under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994. Because the assessee failed to prove that the exchanged goods had already suffered tax and did not produce the relevant books or establish the credit-note transactions, purchase tax was held payable. Penalty was also upheld on the basis that the transactions were omitted from the books and return, the records were not produced even at the appellate stage, and the authorities found deliberate concealment. The revision therefore failed, with tax liability and concealment-based penalty both sustained on the facts found.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243605</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>