<?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>1977 (2) TMI 111 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151293</link>
    <description>Recovery of sales tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 could proceed by distress warrant where the liability had already arisen from the assessee&#039;s own return and the amount was payable in advance under sections 12 and 12-B. No prior show-cause notice was required before attachment and sale of movable property, and a separate assessment order was unnecessary because the tax was already due under the Act. The warrant was not invalid for failing to specify particular movable property, since recovery could be made against any movable property of the assessee. The Magistrate&#039;s ordinary limit on imposing fine did not restrict recovery under section 13(3)(b), which treated the amount due as recoverable as if it were a fine.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Jun 2013 17:01:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168332" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (2) TMI 111 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151293</link>
      <description>Recovery of sales tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 could proceed by distress warrant where the liability had already arisen from the assessee&#039;s own return and the amount was payable in advance under sections 12 and 12-B. No prior show-cause notice was required before attachment and sale of movable property, and a separate assessment order was unnecessary because the tax was already due under the Act. The warrant was not invalid for failing to specify particular movable property, since recovery could be made against any movable property of the assessee. The Magistrate&#039;s ordinary limit on imposing fine did not restrict recovery under section 13(3)(b), which treated the amount due as recoverable as if it were a fine.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151293</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>