<?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>1986 (2) TMI 300 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154472</link>
    <description>Partners of a dissolved firm remain jointly and severally liable for the firm&#039;s pre-dissolution sales tax dues, because the liability attaches to the partners under the Partnership Act and the recovery machinery under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act permits assessment and recovery as if dissolution had not occurred. The amount described as penalty under section 13(2) was treated as compensatory interest in substance, arising automatically on default and recoverable from the liable partners. Section 13(2A) was upheld as a valid remission provision, with the delegation held to be guided and the classification not violative of Article 14.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2013 17:39:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171503" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (2) TMI 300 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154472</link>
      <description>Partners of a dissolved firm remain jointly and severally liable for the firm&#039;s pre-dissolution sales tax dues, because the liability attaches to the partners under the Partnership Act and the recovery machinery under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act permits assessment and recovery as if dissolution had not occurred. The amount described as penalty under section 13(2) was treated as compensatory interest in substance, arising automatically on default and recoverable from the liable partners. Section 13(2A) was upheld as a valid remission provision, with the delegation held to be guided and the classification not violative of Article 14.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154472</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>