<?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>1956 (12) TMI 31 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127632</link>
    <description>Payment of sales tax to the authorised Proverthicar under commenced revenue recovery proceedings was treated as a valid discharge binding on the State. Section 4 of the Travancore-Cochin Revenue Recovery Act authorised payment to that officer and entitled the payer to a receipt, and no particular form of receipt was required. Once recovery proceeded under the Revenue Recovery Act, Rule 15 of the sales tax rules did not restrict the payment. Later fraud or misappropriation by the officer could not defeat the payer&#039;s credit unless the payer was shown to have participated in the fraud. The State was required to give credit for the amount paid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:52:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164507" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1956 (12) TMI 31 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127632</link>
      <description>Payment of sales tax to the authorised Proverthicar under commenced revenue recovery proceedings was treated as a valid discharge binding on the State. Section 4 of the Travancore-Cochin Revenue Recovery Act authorised payment to that officer and entitled the payer to a receipt, and no particular form of receipt was required. Once recovery proceeded under the Revenue Recovery Act, Rule 15 of the sales tax rules did not restrict the payment. Later fraud or misappropriation by the officer could not defeat the payer&#039;s credit unless the payer was shown to have participated in the fraud. The State was required to give credit for the amount paid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 1956 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127632</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>