<?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>1964 (3) TMI 73 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128837</link>
    <description>A payment made toward a specified statutory liability must be appropriated in accordance with the payer&#039;s direction unless the statute provides otherwise, so sales tax deposits could not be diverted to meet a separate liability under section 8-A(4) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. Once the appropriation was found unlawful, the resulting excess recovery lacked legal basis, and the revisional authority&#039;s wide powers under section 10(3) were held sufficient to grant consequential refund relief. Payment in compliance with a statutory demand did not amount to voluntary acquiescence, and the refund direction was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:58:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165706" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (3) TMI 73 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128837</link>
      <description>A payment made toward a specified statutory liability must be appropriated in accordance with the payer&#039;s direction unless the statute provides otherwise, so sales tax deposits could not be diverted to meet a separate liability under section 8-A(4) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. Once the appropriation was found unlawful, the resulting excess recovery lacked legal basis, and the revisional authority&#039;s wide powers under section 10(3) were held sufficient to grant consequential refund relief. Payment in compliance with a statutory demand did not amount to voluntary acquiescence, and the refund direction was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128837</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>