https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369559 Revisional interference under the Karnataka VAT Act was justified where undisputed suppression of purchases in arecanut, tobacco products and gutkha, together with excess stock found on inspection, showed that the appellate order had not properly addressed the basis for reassessment. The Revisional Authority could validly treat the appellate order as prejudicial to revenue and restore the assessment on the footing of detected suppression and permissible estimation of turnover. The challenge to the revision order therefore failed. en-us Wed, 10 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Oct 2018 10:06:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369559 Revisional interference under the Karnataka VAT Act was justified where undisputed suppression of purchases in arecanut, tobacco products and gutkha, together with excess stock found on inspection, showed that the appellate order had not properly addressed the basis for reassessment. The Revisional Authority could validly treat the appellate order as prejudicial to revenue and restore the assessment on the footing of detected suppression and permissible estimation of turnover. The challenge to the revision order therefore failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 10 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369559