<?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>2016 (4) TMI 967 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326853</link>
    <description>A revisional or reassessment order cannot stand on assumptions unsupported by the record. The contract price was inclusive of packing, forwarding, freight, insurance, excise duty, works contract tax and other taxes, and the Revenue produced no material to show that tax had been charged over and above that value. The inference that import of chillers from Malaysia was unlawful was also untenable, because no rule restricted procurement to within the State and no illegality was proved. The HC therefore held the revisional order without legal foundation, quashed it, and confirmed the assessee&#039;s entitlement to refund of the excess tax with statutory interest and costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2016 10:05:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=425667" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 967 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326853</link>
      <description>A revisional or reassessment order cannot stand on assumptions unsupported by the record. The contract price was inclusive of packing, forwarding, freight, insurance, excise duty, works contract tax and other taxes, and the Revenue produced no material to show that tax had been charged over and above that value. The inference that import of chillers from Malaysia was unlawful was also untenable, because no rule restricted procurement to within the State and no illegality was proved. The HC therefore held the revisional order without legal foundation, quashed it, and confirmed the assessee&#039;s entitlement to refund of the excess tax with statutory interest and costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326853</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>