https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166625 Where the statute places on the dealer the burden of proving non-collection of sales tax during the protective period, an inclusive-of-tax endorsement in the bill can constitute prima facie evidence that tax was collected. The sufficiency of rebuttal is a factual question to be decided on the record in each case, and there is no rigid rule that collection must be separately shown in the account books. In the absence of contrary material, the dealer's denial fails, the burden remains undischarged, and tax collection may be inferred from the bill endorsement. en-us Tue, 29 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Jul 2016 14:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166625 Where the statute places on the dealer the burden of proving non-collection of sales tax during the protective period, an inclusive-of-tax endorsement in the bill can constitute prima facie evidence that tax was collected. The sufficiency of rebuttal is a factual question to be decided on the record in each case, and there is no rigid rule that collection must be separately shown in the account books. In the absence of contrary material, the dealer's denial fails, the burden remains undischarged, and tax collection may be inferred from the bill endorsement. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 29 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166625