<?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>1977 (8) TMI 51 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38560</link>
    <description>Materials seized in a search may be used for sales tax assessment even if the search is alleged to be irregular, where the assessment is made on best judgment after the dealer fails to produce accounts and the statute contemplates search and seizure in aid of assessment. The material was accepted as usable because the assessee had opportunities to inspect it and no effective objection was raised at the assessment stage. Revisional interference with turnover enhancement was also confined to errors of law; quantification based on seized accounts and consumption figures was treated as a factual determination, so no revisional correction was justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2013 16:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=77106" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (8) TMI 51 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38560</link>
      <description>Materials seized in a search may be used for sales tax assessment even if the search is alleged to be irregular, where the assessment is made on best judgment after the dealer fails to produce accounts and the statute contemplates search and seizure in aid of assessment. The material was accepted as usable because the assessee had opportunities to inspect it and no effective objection was raised at the assessment stage. Revisional interference with turnover enhancement was also confined to errors of law; quantification based on seized accounts and consumption figures was treated as a factual determination, so no revisional correction was justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>