<?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>2008 (11) TMI 728 - Kerala High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278015</link>
    <description>Best judgment assessment by adding gross profit to the cost of goods transferred from head office to a branch was sustained where the branch sold below the transfer value and the returns were treated as incomplete. The appellate authority reduced the gross profit addition from 10% to 5% but accepted that a claimed loss sale could not be accepted on explanation alone. The revision court held that a branch was not expected to sell below the head office&#039;s indicated value and found the cited precedent inapplicable on the facts. The estimation of turnover was therefore upheld, and the legal questions were answered against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2019 16:35:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=550972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (11) TMI 728 - Kerala High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278015</link>
      <description>Best judgment assessment by adding gross profit to the cost of goods transferred from head office to a branch was sustained where the branch sold below the transfer value and the returns were treated as incomplete. The appellate authority reduced the gross profit addition from 10% to 5% but accepted that a claimed loss sale could not be accepted on explanation alone. The revision court held that a branch was not expected to sell below the head office&#039;s indicated value and found the cited precedent inapplicable on the facts. The estimation of turnover was therefore upheld, and the legal questions were answered against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278015</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>