<?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>2008 (7) TMI 905 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164263</link>
    <description>On revision under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, the High Court declined to interfere with a best judgment assessment based on check-post declarations after rejection of the books of account and returns. The Tribunal had reasoned that the additional addition equal to the suppressed turnover, including gross profit, was justified because the earlier lump-sum reduction was not supported and the higher estimate was not excessive. The estimation was treated as a factual finding founded on the material on record, and the court held that it was neither perverse nor arbitrary. The revision was therefore rejected and the Tribunal&#039;s estimation upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2014 15:12:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353440" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 905 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164263</link>
      <description>On revision under section 41 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, the High Court declined to interfere with a best judgment assessment based on check-post declarations after rejection of the books of account and returns. The Tribunal had reasoned that the additional addition equal to the suppressed turnover, including gross profit, was justified because the earlier lump-sum reduction was not supported and the higher estimate was not excessive. The estimation was treated as a factual finding founded on the material on record, and the court held that it was neither perverse nor arbitrary. The revision was therefore rejected and the Tribunal&#039;s estimation upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164263</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>