<?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>2009 (6) TMI 933 - CENTRAL SALES TAX APPELLATE AUTHORITY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163981</link>
    <description>Filing of Form F under section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 shifts the initial burden on a stock transfer claim, but the assessing authority may still test the genuineness of the declarations against other material. Here, the reassessment was partly sustained because the record contained suspicious circumstances indicating direct inter-State sales, yet the material did not justify treating the entire disputed turnover as such, so only 25 per cent was upheld. A penalty imposed under section 12(3)(b) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 was unsustainable because the dispute was over transaction character and there was no wilful nondisclosure; the penalty was therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2019 11:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352300" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 933 - CENTRAL SALES TAX APPELLATE AUTHORITY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163981</link>
      <description>Filing of Form F under section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 shifts the initial burden on a stock transfer claim, but the assessing authority may still test the genuineness of the declarations against other material. Here, the reassessment was partly sustained because the record contained suspicious circumstances indicating direct inter-State sales, yet the material did not justify treating the entire disputed turnover as such, so only 25 per cent was upheld. A penalty imposed under section 12(3)(b) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 was unsustainable because the dispute was over transaction character and there was no wilful nondisclosure; the penalty was therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163981</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>