<?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>1972 (9) TMI 128 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150463</link>
    <description>Under the unamended proviso to section 38(3) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, the appellate pre-deposit was to be computed on the balance tax and penalty remaining due after assessment, not on the gross amount originally assessed. The proviso was read with the main sub-section, which required payment of the tax or penalty in dispute as a condition for admission of the appeal and allowed the appellate authority to permit a smaller deposit, subject to the statutory minimum. The 15 April 1968 amendment expressly referring to the balance due was treated as clarificatory, confirming that the operative amount was the net outstanding demand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 11:46:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167503" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (9) TMI 128 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150463</link>
      <description>Under the unamended proviso to section 38(3) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, the appellate pre-deposit was to be computed on the balance tax and penalty remaining due after assessment, not on the gross amount originally assessed. The proviso was read with the main sub-section, which required payment of the tax or penalty in dispute as a condition for admission of the appeal and allowed the appellate authority to permit a smaller deposit, subject to the statutory minimum. The 15 April 1968 amendment expressly referring to the balance due was treated as clarificatory, confirming that the operative amount was the net outstanding demand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150463</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>