<?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>1987 (8) TMI 423 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155409</link>
    <description>The writ petitions challenged an amended requirement under rule 41C to maintain a register in Form XB and file extracts with the weekly return, as well as a demand to furnish the certificate prescribed under section 4A(6). The HC disposed of the petitions without examining the merits of those contentions, so no ruling was given on whether the rule was ultra vires or whether the certificate could be compelled.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2013 12:00:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172440" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (8) TMI 423 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155409</link>
      <description>The writ petitions challenged an amended requirement under rule 41C to maintain a register in Form XB and file extracts with the weekly return, as well as a demand to furnish the certificate prescribed under section 4A(6). The HC disposed of the petitions without examining the merits of those contentions, so no ruling was given on whether the rule was ultra vires or whether the certificate could be compelled.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155409</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>