<?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>2018 (1) TMI 1049 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354313</link>
    <description>In works contract assessments under the Tamil Nadu VAT regime, the Tribunal accepted the conventional use of 10% notional gross profit to estimate deemed sales turnover where proper accounts and supporting records were not maintained or produced. It also noted that the value of goods transferred can include purchase cost, transport and incidental expenses, together with the relatable profit element. The natural justice challenge failed because the estimate was not treated as separately disclosed material requiring further procedural safeguards, and no statutory basis was shown for insisting on additional disclosure before applying the conventional percentage. The Tribunal&#039;s orders were upheld and the revisions were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2018 18:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=505837" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 1049 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354313</link>
      <description>In works contract assessments under the Tamil Nadu VAT regime, the Tribunal accepted the conventional use of 10% notional gross profit to estimate deemed sales turnover where proper accounts and supporting records were not maintained or produced. It also noted that the value of goods transferred can include purchase cost, transport and incidental expenses, together with the relatable profit element. The natural justice challenge failed because the estimate was not treated as separately disclosed material requiring further procedural safeguards, and no statutory basis was shown for insisting on additional disclosure before applying the conventional percentage. The Tribunal&#039;s orders were upheld and the revisions were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354313</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>