https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164144 Second-sale exemption was denied where the alleged sellers were shown not to have carried on business during the relevant assessment years and the purchase bills were treated as bogus. The court noted that reopening under section 16(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was supported by direct evidence from premises owners, and that registration certificates or marketing permits alone could not prove genuine purchases. A seller's valid registration was therefore insufficient when the material on record established non-existent business activity. The assessment and penalty were upheld in favour of the Revenue. en-us Wed, 09 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 05 Oct 2014 16:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164144 Second-sale exemption was denied where the alleged sellers were shown not to have carried on business during the relevant assessment years and the purchase bills were treated as bogus. The court noted that reopening under section 16(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was supported by direct evidence from premises owners, and that registration certificates or marketing permits alone could not prove genuine purchases. A seller's valid registration was therefore insufficient when the material on record established non-existent business activity. The assessment and penalty were upheld in favour of the Revenue. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 09 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164144