<?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 (12) TMI 1706 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200444</link>
    <description>Failure to obtain and produce the requisite transit pass for goods carried through Rajasthan under the VAT scheme triggered a statutory presumption that the goods were sold within the State, enabling the authority to levy tax and impose penalty after giving an opportunity of hearing. The transit-pass requirement was treated as mandatory and requiring strict compliance. Because the petitioner produced a pass only for one set of goods, while none was shown for the goods in question, the later affidavit and documents did not rebut the presumption. The factual findings recorded by the assessing authority and Tax Board were not interfered with, and the tax and penalty were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2018 07:31:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=515132" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1706 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200444</link>
      <description>Failure to obtain and produce the requisite transit pass for goods carried through Rajasthan under the VAT scheme triggered a statutory presumption that the goods were sold within the State, enabling the authority to levy tax and impose penalty after giving an opportunity of hearing. The transit-pass requirement was treated as mandatory and requiring strict compliance. Because the petitioner produced a pass only for one set of goods, while none was shown for the goods in question, the later affidavit and documents did not rebut the presumption. The factual findings recorded by the assessing authority and Tax Board were not interfered with, and the tax and penalty were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>