https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397347 Luxury tax on a houseboat was challenged on the ground that tax had already been paid at another place, but the challenge failed because the petitioner could not prove that the assessed boat was the same vessel covered by the earlier permission; a later lease deed, without reliable supporting material, was treated as self-serving. The limitation objection also failed because the houseboat had not been registered and returns had not been filed under the Act, so the ordinary limitation period was held inapplicable to a person who had operated the vessel clandestinely to avoid tax. The tax demand was sustained. en-us Fri, 07 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Aug 2020 07:49:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397347 Luxury tax on a houseboat was challenged on the ground that tax had already been paid at another place, but the challenge failed because the petitioner could not prove that the assessed boat was the same vessel covered by the earlier permission; a later lease deed, without reliable supporting material, was treated as self-serving. The limitation objection also failed because the houseboat had not been registered and returns had not been filed under the Act, so the ordinary limitation period was held inapplicable to a person who had operated the vessel clandestinely to avoid tax. The tax demand was sustained. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 07 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397347