<?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 (4) TMI 262 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153906</link>
    <description>A pre-import declaration form requiring registered dealers to obtain a permit in advance for road import of goods from outside Assam was held unauthorized. The Court found that, although the Act and Rules already provided mechanisms to curb tax evasion through movement restrictions, check posts, prescribed declarations and information requests, those safeguards did not authorise a further permit regime or additional particulars beyond the prescribed forms. Because the impugned direction directly impeded the free flow of trade and lacked support in the rule-making framework, it was ultra vires the powers of the Superintendent of Taxes and the Commissioner and was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Aug 2013 15:32:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170940" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (4) TMI 262 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153906</link>
      <description>A pre-import declaration form requiring registered dealers to obtain a permit in advance for road import of goods from outside Assam was held unauthorized. The Court found that, although the Act and Rules already provided mechanisms to curb tax evasion through movement restrictions, check posts, prescribed declarations and information requests, those safeguards did not authorise a further permit regime or additional particulars beyond the prescribed forms. Because the impugned direction directly impeded the free flow of trade and lacked support in the rule-making framework, it was ultra vires the powers of the Superintendent of Taxes and the Commissioner and was quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153906</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>