<?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 (10) TMI 158 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153278</link>
    <description>Section 9 of the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1976 operated as a retrospective validating provision from 5 January 1957, saving penalties imposed or purportedly imposed under a State&#039;s general sales tax law in relation to the Central Sales Tax Act. Although the penalty for delayed filing under rule 8(2) of the Central Sales Tax (Orissa) Rules, 1957 had been set aside on the ground that the parent Act contained no express penalty provision, the amendment cured that defect and preserved the levy notwithstanding contrary judgments or orders. The penalty therefore could not be annulled, and the referred question was answered in favour of the revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jul 2013 17:00:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170314" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (10) TMI 158 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153278</link>
      <description>Section 9 of the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1976 operated as a retrospective validating provision from 5 January 1957, saving penalties imposed or purportedly imposed under a State&#039;s general sales tax law in relation to the Central Sales Tax Act. Although the penalty for delayed filing under rule 8(2) of the Central Sales Tax (Orissa) Rules, 1957 had been set aside on the ground that the parent Act contained no express penalty provision, the amendment cured that defect and preserved the levy notwithstanding contrary judgments or orders. The penalty therefore could not be annulled, and the referred question was answered in favour of the revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153278</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>