<?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 (1) TMI 1143 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166008</link>
    <description>Estimation of turnover after rejection of a dealer&#039;s books of account is treated as a question of fact, not a question of law. Where the assessment, first appeal, and Tribunal all rest on estimation, revisional interference under section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 is confined to legal issues and does not permit reappreciation of factual findings. On that basis, no question of law arose for interference in revision, and the issue was decided against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2014 08:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363547" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 1143 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166008</link>
      <description>Estimation of turnover after rejection of a dealer&#039;s books of account is treated as a question of fact, not a question of law. Where the assessment, first appeal, and Tribunal all rest on estimation, revisional interference under section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 is confined to legal issues and does not permit reappreciation of factual findings. On that basis, no question of law arose for interference in revision, and the issue was decided against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166008</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>