<?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>2024 (11) TMI 1276 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762290</link>
    <description>HC set aside assessment orders under Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for periods 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1999-00 regarding inclusion of freight charges in cement sale price. Court found assessing authority failed to conduct proper examination as directed by AAC remand order. Department&#039;s contention of freight suppression was unsupported by evidence - post-October 1996 invoice showed higher price than pre-October invoice, contradicting suppression claim. Comparison of invoices including depot transfer invoice was inadequate to establish suppression under Section 12A. Since petitioner&#039;s books were not rejected and contained freight component details, assessments lacked proper foundation. Writ petitions allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2024 08:16:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=779728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 1276 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762290</link>
      <description>HC set aside assessment orders under Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for periods 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1999-00 regarding inclusion of freight charges in cement sale price. Court found assessing authority failed to conduct proper examination as directed by AAC remand order. Department&#039;s contention of freight suppression was unsupported by evidence - post-October 1996 invoice showed higher price than pre-October invoice, contradicting suppression claim. Comparison of invoices including depot transfer invoice was inadequate to establish suppression under Section 12A. Since petitioner&#039;s books were not rejected and contained freight component details, assessments lacked proper foundation. Writ petitions allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762290</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>