<?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>2010 (2) TMI 1080 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164500</link>
    <description>The High Court declined revisional interference with the Tribunal&#039;s factual finding of suppression of turnover under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, because the inspection records, day book and cash balance, missing stock account for outside-State purchases, and excess stock at inspection supported the conclusion. The Tribunal&#039;s estimate of suppressed turnover based on the trading account and earlier gross profit rate was accepted, and the dealer&#039;s explanation founded on delivery challans and later purchase bills was rejected on facts. As no perversity, illegality, or irregularity was shown, the finding of suppression and the consequential penalty were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2014 17:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353941" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 1080 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164500</link>
      <description>The High Court declined revisional interference with the Tribunal&#039;s factual finding of suppression of turnover under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, because the inspection records, day book and cash balance, missing stock account for outside-State purchases, and excess stock at inspection supported the conclusion. The Tribunal&#039;s estimate of suppressed turnover based on the trading account and earlier gross profit rate was accepted, and the dealer&#039;s explanation founded on delivery challans and later purchase bills was rejected on facts. As no perversity, illegality, or irregularity was shown, the finding of suppression and the consequential penalty were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164500</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>