<?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>1965 (12) TMI 32 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49247</link>
    <description>Best judgment assessment of escaped turnover must rest on relevant material and a fair estimate with a reasonable nexus to the facts; some guesswork is permissible, but a mechanical application of one shop&#039;s concealed turnover ratio to another shop without independent support is capricious and arbitrary, and such an assessment cannot stand. Where revisional jurisdiction is confined to questions of law, interference is warranted if the Tribunal confirms an assessment reached through a legally impermissible approach, because that confirmation itself involves an error of law. The document states that the impugned assessments were therefore liable to be set aside and the revisional court was competent to correct the legal error.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2026 11:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87727" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (12) TMI 32 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49247</link>
      <description>Best judgment assessment of escaped turnover must rest on relevant material and a fair estimate with a reasonable nexus to the facts; some guesswork is permissible, but a mechanical application of one shop&#039;s concealed turnover ratio to another shop without independent support is capricious and arbitrary, and such an assessment cannot stand. Where revisional jurisdiction is confined to questions of law, interference is warranted if the Tribunal confirms an assessment reached through a legally impermissible approach, because that confirmation itself involves an error of law. The document states that the impugned assessments were therefore liable to be set aside and the revisional court was competent to correct the legal error.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49247</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>