<?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>2011 (6) TMI 695 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165854</link>
    <description>An estimate of suppressed turnover based only on a statistical survey of one superior grade of PVC hose pipe was found unreliable where the assessee manufactured three grades and no independent inspection, stock verification, recovery, or other corroborative material supported rejection of the accounts. On that basis, the turnover addition was deleted in favour of the assessee. The penalty under section 12(3)(b) of the TNGST Act also fell away because it was wholly consequential to the unsustainable turnover estimate, and the accounts had not been discredited by acceptable material. The revision therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=362952" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (6) TMI 695 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165854</link>
      <description>An estimate of suppressed turnover based only on a statistical survey of one superior grade of PVC hose pipe was found unreliable where the assessee manufactured three grades and no independent inspection, stock verification, recovery, or other corroborative material supported rejection of the accounts. On that basis, the turnover addition was deleted in favour of the assessee. The penalty under section 12(3)(b) of the TNGST Act also fell away because it was wholly consequential to the unsustainable turnover estimate, and the accounts had not been discredited by acceptable material. The revision therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165854</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>