<?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>1990 (6) TMI 201 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155983</link>
    <description>The Court set aside the Tribunal&#039;s order and remanded the case for reconsideration on its merits, emphasizing that both the authority issuing the registration certificate and any competent authority have the power to levy penalties for violations under section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act. The judgment clarified the misapplication of a Supreme Court ruling by the Tribunal and underscored the significance of interpreting statutory provisions accurately in tax cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Sep 2013 15:59:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173010" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (6) TMI 201 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155983</link>
      <description>The Court set aside the Tribunal&#039;s order and remanded the case for reconsideration on its merits, emphasizing that both the authority issuing the registration certificate and any competent authority have the power to levy penalties for violations under section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act. The judgment clarified the misapplication of a Supreme Court ruling by the Tribunal and underscored the significance of interpreting statutory provisions accurately in tax cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155983</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>