<?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>1988 (9) TMI 324 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155827</link>
    <description>The power to waive pre-deposit of tax pending appeal was confined to cases where the authority was satisfied that the dealer was unable to pay. A claim that the disputed turnover was not taxable on merits did not, by itself, justify waiver. The Tribunal&#039;s finding that the assessee had not established inability to pay was treated as a finding of fact, and the High Court would not reappreciate that conclusion in writ jurisdiction under Article 226. The pre-deposit challenge therefore failed, and the statutory payment requirement could not be displaced merely because the assessee expected success in appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Sep 2013 12:53:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172854" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (9) TMI 324 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155827</link>
      <description>The power to waive pre-deposit of tax pending appeal was confined to cases where the authority was satisfied that the dealer was unable to pay. A claim that the disputed turnover was not taxable on merits did not, by itself, justify waiver. The Tribunal&#039;s finding that the assessee had not established inability to pay was treated as a finding of fact, and the High Court would not reappreciate that conclusion in writ jurisdiction under Article 226. The pre-deposit challenge therefore failed, and the statutory payment requirement could not be displaced merely because the assessee expected success in appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155827</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>