<?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 (12) TMI 479 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167975</link>
    <description>Plywood sales under the Sixth Schedule are taxable at every point of sale, but a dealer claiming rebate under section 5(3) read with the second proviso to Explanation II must prove that tax was already paid at the immediately preceding point. Where sale bills do not separately show prior-point tax and the dealer fails to produce reliable proof of opening stock, closing stock, and tax payment at the earlier stage, the statutory formula and Explanation II apply, and the rebate claim fails. On the turnover issue, the revisional authority was justified in adding turnover where the dealer&#039;s own accounts did not satisfactorily show that the amount had already suffered tax or was otherwise exempt. The revised assessment was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2015 18:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373104" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (12) TMI 479 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167975</link>
      <description>Plywood sales under the Sixth Schedule are taxable at every point of sale, but a dealer claiming rebate under section 5(3) read with the second proviso to Explanation II must prove that tax was already paid at the immediately preceding point. Where sale bills do not separately show prior-point tax and the dealer fails to produce reliable proof of opening stock, closing stock, and tax payment at the earlier stage, the statutory formula and Explanation II apply, and the rebate claim fails. On the turnover issue, the revisional authority was justified in adding turnover where the dealer&#039;s own accounts did not satisfactorily show that the amount had already suffered tax or was otherwise exempt. The revised assessment was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167975</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>