<?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 (1) TMI 1289 - Madras High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166473</link>
    <description>Second sales exemption under section 10 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 depended on the registration status of the selling dealers and the supporting records produced by the assessee. The appellate record showed that one dealer&#039;s cancellation was recorded after the relevant period, while the other dealer&#039;s cancellation dates were inconsistent, and renewal-fee receipts were also produced. On that material, the exemption claim was accepted because reliable proof of valid cancellation of the sellers&#039; registration certificates was not established, and the claim could not be rejected on the assessing authority&#039;s assertions alone. The Tribunal&#039;s affirmation reflected the same appreciation of evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 28 Sep 2014 12:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=365907" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 1289 - Madras High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166473</link>
      <description>Second sales exemption under section 10 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 depended on the registration status of the selling dealers and the supporting records produced by the assessee. The appellate record showed that one dealer&#039;s cancellation was recorded after the relevant period, while the other dealer&#039;s cancellation dates were inconsistent, and renewal-fee receipts were also produced. On that material, the exemption claim was accepted because reliable proof of valid cancellation of the sellers&#039; registration certificates was not established, and the claim could not be rejected on the assessing authority&#039;s assertions alone. The Tribunal&#039;s affirmation reflected the same appreciation of evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166473</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>