https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245785 In a works contract, deduction for labour and like charges depends on the dealer producing books of account, bills, and vouchers sufficient to ascertain the expenditure. Where those records are not produced before the assessing authority, the residuary method under Rule 3(2)(m) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 may be applied, and only the prescribed deduction allowed. A contrary first appellate finding that the expenditure was ascertainable from the records was treated as unsustainable because the supporting material had not been produced at the relevant stage. The revisional authority was therefore justified in correcting the erroneous appellate order as prejudicial to the revenue under Section 64(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003. en-us Fri, 07 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Jul 2015 18:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245785 In a works contract, deduction for labour and like charges depends on the dealer producing books of account, bills, and vouchers sufficient to ascertain the expenditure. Where those records are not produced before the assessing authority, the residuary method under Rule 3(2)(m) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 may be applied, and only the prescribed deduction allowed. A contrary first appellate finding that the expenditure was ascertainable from the records was treated as unsustainable because the supporting material had not been produced at the relevant stage. The revisional authority was therefore justified in correcting the erroneous appellate order as prejudicial to the revenue under Section 64(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 07 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245785