<?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 (11) TMI 95 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144073</link>
    <description>Section 21(4) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 was construed broadly to permit forfeiture where a registered dealer collected any amount by way of tax in excess of the tax payable for the year. The tax payable was the annual liability assessed on turnover of sales, not the tax on each transaction. On that basis, collections made on transactions that were not sales could be included in the aggregate to determine whether the dealer had collected more than was lawfully payable. The provision was applied to prevent retention of amounts collected without a corresponding tax liability, and the forfeiture was held valid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 11:16:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166071" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (11) TMI 95 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144073</link>
      <description>Section 21(4) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 was construed broadly to permit forfeiture where a registered dealer collected any amount by way of tax in excess of the tax payable for the year. The tax payable was the annual liability assessed on turnover of sales, not the tax on each transaction. On that basis, collections made on transactions that were not sales could be included in the aggregate to determine whether the dealer had collected more than was lawfully payable. The provision was applied to prevent retention of amounts collected without a corresponding tax liability, and the forfeiture was held valid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144073</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>