<?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>2004 (6) TMI 614 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162727</link>
    <description>Dealings in cashewnuts were held to bring the petitioner within the statutory definition of &quot;dealer&quot; under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, because the records showed sales and receipt of sale proceeds, while the claim of acting only as an intermediary lacked supporting material; the transactions were therefore exigible to tax, and the plea that they were inter-State was rejected for want of proof. On penalty, the discretionary power under section 45A had to be exercised reasonably, and the long delay, absence of independent enquiry, limited material, and bona fide belief on tax liability justified moderation; the penalty was accordingly reduced as excessive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2014 12:52:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348530" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 614 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162727</link>
      <description>Dealings in cashewnuts were held to bring the petitioner within the statutory definition of &quot;dealer&quot; under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, because the records showed sales and receipt of sale proceeds, while the claim of acting only as an intermediary lacked supporting material; the transactions were therefore exigible to tax, and the plea that they were inter-State was rejected for want of proof. On penalty, the discretionary power under section 45A had to be exercised reasonably, and the long delay, absence of independent enquiry, limited material, and bona fide belief on tax liability justified moderation; the penalty was accordingly reduced as excessive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162727</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>