<?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 208 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156317</link>
    <description>A permit issued under section 15 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 does not exclude the separate transit powers under section 29A, because section 15 governs travelling salesmen permits while section 29A authorises interception, inspection and detention of goods in transit on suspicion of improper documents or tax evasion. The detention proceedings were therefore competent. The text also states that penalty under section 45A is sustainable where the assessee disobeys a detention notice issued under section 29A(2) read with rule 35A and removes the vehicle without furnishing security. It further notes that a penalty fixed at twice the amount involved was within the statutory ceiling and justified in quantum.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2013 18:39:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173344" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (6) TMI 208 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156317</link>
      <description>A permit issued under section 15 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 does not exclude the separate transit powers under section 29A, because section 15 governs travelling salesmen permits while section 29A authorises interception, inspection and detention of goods in transit on suspicion of improper documents or tax evasion. The detention proceedings were therefore competent. The text also states that penalty under section 45A is sustainable where the assessee disobeys a detention notice issued under section 29A(2) read with rule 35A and removes the vehicle without furnishing security. It further notes that a penalty fixed at twice the amount involved was within the statutory ceiling and justified in quantum.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156317</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>