<?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>2023 (10) TMI 492 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444269</link>
    <description>Best judgment enhancement of local sales tax was upheld where seized diaries, loose papers and unexplained stock discrepancies justified an adverse inference and the dealer failed to produce a credible stock reconciliation. CST liability, however, required proof that inter-State movement of goods was occasioned by a prior contract of sale or purchase; mere branch transfer or stock movement was insufficient. On the record, the material did not adequately link the goods movement with actual sale transactions, so the CST demand was set aside and remanded. The tribunal&#039;s refusal to direct supply of documents was also sustained because the application was belated and no prejudice or due diligence was shown.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2025 14:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=728879" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 492 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444269</link>
      <description>Best judgment enhancement of local sales tax was upheld where seized diaries, loose papers and unexplained stock discrepancies justified an adverse inference and the dealer failed to produce a credible stock reconciliation. CST liability, however, required proof that inter-State movement of goods was occasioned by a prior contract of sale or purchase; mere branch transfer or stock movement was insufficient. On the record, the material did not adequately link the goods movement with actual sale transactions, so the CST demand was set aside and remanded. The tribunal&#039;s refusal to direct supply of documents was also sustained because the application was belated and no prejudice or due diligence was shown.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444269</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>