https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165320 Concurrent factual findings in luxury tax proceedings, based on bills, room tariffs and discount entries, showed that the assessee had charged tariff inconsistently with the prescribed form and had attempted to evade tax on some rooms and bills. The appellate authority also took mitigating circumstances into account, including maintenance of the statutory return form and deposit of tax, and reduced the assessment, penalty and compounding amount. The writ court held that these conclusions turned on appreciation of evidence and that no jurisdictional or legal infirmity was shown to justify interference under article 226. The challenge to the assessment, penalty and compounding charges was therefore rejected. en-us Wed, 06 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165320 Concurrent factual findings in luxury tax proceedings, based on bills, room tariffs and discount entries, showed that the assessee had charged tariff inconsistently with the prescribed form and had attempted to evade tax on some rooms and bills. The appellate authority also took mitigating circumstances into account, including maintenance of the statutory return form and deposit of tax, and reduced the assessment, penalty and compounding amount. The writ court held that these conclusions turned on appreciation of evidence and that no jurisdictional or legal infirmity was shown to justify interference under article 226. The challenge to the assessment, penalty and compounding charges was therefore rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165320