https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363958 The Tribunal's estimate of tax liability was upheld because the survey material, including loose papers, matched purchase and sales details such as dates, vehicle numbers, quantity, value and names, while the books produced did not correspond to those records. The dealer had not produced the required books of account during survey, and the Tribunal had already substantially reduced the turnover while sustaining rejection of the books. A discrepancy in one loose paper was treated as a typographical error and did not undermine the findings. No perversity or substantial question of law was shown under the U.P. VAT Act, 2008, so the revisions failed. en-us Mon, 02 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Jul 2018 09:35:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363958 The Tribunal's estimate of tax liability was upheld because the survey material, including loose papers, matched purchase and sales details such as dates, vehicle numbers, quantity, value and names, while the books produced did not correspond to those records. The dealer had not produced the required books of account during survey, and the Tribunal had already substantially reduced the turnover while sustaining rejection of the books. A discrepancy in one loose paper was treated as a typographical error and did not undermine the findings. No perversity or substantial question of law was shown under the U.P. VAT Act, 2008, so the revisions failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 02 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363958