<?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 (10) TMI 855 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333835</link>
    <description>Input tax credit could not be reversed merely for alleged non-production of documents or because selling dealers&#039; registrations were retrospectively cancelled. The petitioner had produced tax invoices, accounts and return particulars, and the assessment was found unsustainable because the authority relied on the same material for cross-verification yet denied credit without giving a proper opportunity to clarify the documents. Retrospective cancellation of the sellers&#039; registrations did not by itself defeat the purchaser&#039;s entitlement where the transactions were supported by invoices and tax payment. The reversal was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh assessment with personal hearing and reconsideration of the documents in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2016 08:24:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=445903" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 855 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333835</link>
      <description>Input tax credit could not be reversed merely for alleged non-production of documents or because selling dealers&#039; registrations were retrospectively cancelled. The petitioner had produced tax invoices, accounts and return particulars, and the assessment was found unsustainable because the authority relied on the same material for cross-verification yet denied credit without giving a proper opportunity to clarify the documents. Retrospective cancellation of the sellers&#039; registrations did not by itself defeat the purchaser&#039;s entitlement where the transactions were supported by invoices and tax payment. The reversal was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh assessment with personal hearing and reconsideration of the documents in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333835</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>