<?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>1981 (11) TMI 163 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153263</link>
    <description>Where the statutory exemption or turnover threshold means no tax liability arises on the returned turnover, there is no legally supportable component of &quot;tax not disputed in appeal&quot; for purposes of a pre-deposit bar. The Karnataka High Court&#039;s reasoning was that, on the facts, the entire tax determined by the assessing authority remained in dispute and the appellate authorities erred in treating the appeal as barred for non-payment of alleged undisputed tax. The result is that the maintainability bar under section 20(3) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act did not apply, and the appeal should have been entertained without insisting on pre-deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jul 2013 15:47:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170299" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (11) TMI 163 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153263</link>
      <description>Where the statutory exemption or turnover threshold means no tax liability arises on the returned turnover, there is no legally supportable component of &quot;tax not disputed in appeal&quot; for purposes of a pre-deposit bar. The Karnataka High Court&#039;s reasoning was that, on the facts, the entire tax determined by the assessing authority remained in dispute and the appellate authorities erred in treating the appeal as barred for non-payment of alleged undisputed tax. The result is that the maintainability bar under section 20(3) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act did not apply, and the appeal should have been entertained without insisting on pre-deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153263</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>