<?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>1976 (12) TMI 168 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151239</link>
    <description>Recovery proceedings for arrears of sales tax were upheld because service of the demand notice on Vasudeo was treated as sufficient in the circumstances. The Court accepted that he had appeared before the assessing authority for the petitioner and produced the books of account, which supported the conclusion that he was not a stranger to the proceedings. The petitioner&#039;s earlier arrest for realisation of the arrears and undertaking to pay the tax by instalments further weakened the objection to notice service. The challenge to recovery therefore failed, and the petition was dismissed in favour of the revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Jun 2013 09:56:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168278" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (12) TMI 168 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151239</link>
      <description>Recovery proceedings for arrears of sales tax were upheld because service of the demand notice on Vasudeo was treated as sufficient in the circumstances. The Court accepted that he had appeared before the assessing authority for the petitioner and produced the books of account, which supported the conclusion that he was not a stranger to the proceedings. The petitioner&#039;s earlier arrest for realisation of the arrears and undertaking to pay the tax by instalments further weakened the objection to notice service. The challenge to recovery therefore failed, and the petition was dismissed in favour of the revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151239</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>