<?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>2003 (4) TMI 545 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162351</link>
    <description>An income-tax audit report was accepted as sufficient compliance with the sales tax audit requirement under section 10A and rule 19A, avoiding duplicative audit certification. The accountant was not required to furnish a separate certificate in form XXXI. The remaining particulars in form XXXI-A were still to be supplied by the dealer, and the sales tax department could modify the form to reflect that construction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:03:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=347121" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 545 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162351</link>
      <description>An income-tax audit report was accepted as sufficient compliance with the sales tax audit requirement under section 10A and rule 19A, avoiding duplicative audit certification. The accountant was not required to furnish a separate certificate in form XXXI. The remaining particulars in form XXXI-A were still to be supplied by the dealer, and the sales tax department could modify the form to reflect that construction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162351</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>