<?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>2019 (1) TMI 896 - Central Sales Tax Appellate Authority New Delhi</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373731</link>
    <description>Where inspection material and transaction records create a prima facie basis to suspect that claimed consignment transfers are in substance inter-State sales, a limited remand for fresh examination of the disputed transactions on all relevant materials and attendant circumstances is proper. The remand was confined to the transactions involving Bhuwalka Trade Links (P) Limited, while the remaining transactions were not disturbed for lack of clinching evidence. Penalty was also required to be reconsidered independently after reassessment, because it could not automatically follow from the disputed exemption claim and depended on the factual findings and the legal requirements applicable to penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2019 10:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=553651" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 896 - Central Sales Tax Appellate Authority New Delhi</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373731</link>
      <description>Where inspection material and transaction records create a prima facie basis to suspect that claimed consignment transfers are in substance inter-State sales, a limited remand for fresh examination of the disputed transactions on all relevant materials and attendant circumstances is proper. The remand was confined to the transactions involving Bhuwalka Trade Links (P) Limited, while the remaining transactions were not disturbed for lack of clinching evidence. Penalty was also required to be reconsidered independently after reassessment, because it could not automatically follow from the disputed exemption claim and depended on the factual findings and the legal requirements applicable to penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373731</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>