<?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>1955 (11) TMI 25 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127431</link>
    <description>Sales tax liability under the Act was fastened on the dealer, and the assessment and recovery machinery operated only against that dealer. Although the Act specifically permitted recovery from the assets of a deceased assessee, it contained no provision authorising recovery from a transferee of the dealer&#039;s property, and no charge was created on the transferred machinery and building. So long as the sale deed remained valid and unset aside, the transferor&#039;s unpaid sales tax could not be enforced against the purchasers. Recovery from the transferees was therefore impermissible, and mandamus would lie to restrain such recovery.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 1955 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2013 18:12:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164308" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1955 (11) TMI 25 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127431</link>
      <description>Sales tax liability under the Act was fastened on the dealer, and the assessment and recovery machinery operated only against that dealer. Although the Act specifically permitted recovery from the assets of a deceased assessee, it contained no provision authorising recovery from a transferee of the dealer&#039;s property, and no charge was created on the transferred machinery and building. So long as the sale deed remained valid and unset aside, the transferor&#039;s unpaid sales tax could not be enforced against the purchasers. Recovery from the transferees was therefore impermissible, and mandamus would lie to restrain such recovery.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 1955 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127431</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>