<?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>1971 (1) TMI 100 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100752</link>
    <description>Sales tax liability under section 17 of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944 can be enforced against a transferee only where ownership of the registered dealer&#039;s business has been entirely transferred and that factual basis is specifically found. In the absence of a finding that the whole business was transferred, recovery could not be made from a person who had not been assessed as the dealer. An earlier declaration of liability for another assessment period did not operate as res judicata for the present recovery proceedings, because each assessment period is distinct and required an independent determination of transferee status. The recovery order was therefore unsustainable and the matter required reconsideration after notice and evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137802" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (1) TMI 100 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100752</link>
      <description>Sales tax liability under section 17 of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944 can be enforced against a transferee only where ownership of the registered dealer&#039;s business has been entirely transferred and that factual basis is specifically found. In the absence of a finding that the whole business was transferred, recovery could not be made from a person who had not been assessed as the dealer. An earlier declaration of liability for another assessment period did not operate as res judicata for the present recovery proceedings, because each assessment period is distinct and required an independent determination of transferee status. The recovery order was therefore unsustainable and the matter required reconsideration after notice and evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100752</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>