https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341286 Concurrent factual findings that Form ST-17 had been misused and that no purchases were made from the named dealer were upheld, because the assessee had promptly reported the theft or misuse and lodged an FIR, while the revenue failed to prove the alleged taxable transaction by proper verification. As the dispute depended on appreciation of evidence and no perversity or substantial question of law was shown, writ interference was refused and the levy was not sustained. en-us Fri, 31 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Apr 2017 07:29:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341286 Concurrent factual findings that Form ST-17 had been misused and that no purchases were made from the named dealer were upheld, because the assessee had promptly reported the theft or misuse and lodged an FIR, while the revenue failed to prove the alleged taxable transaction by proper verification. As the dispute depended on appreciation of evidence and no perversity or substantial question of law was shown, writ interference was refused and the levy was not sustained. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 31 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341286