<?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 (7) TMI 343 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156453</link>
    <description>Section 44 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, read with rules 43(2) and 44, provides the exclusive scheme for refund or adjustment of excess tax after final assessment or on receipt of an appellate or revisional order. If the assessing authority does not act within ninety days, the taxpayer&#039;s statutory remedy is interest at six per cent per annum on the refundable amount until payment or adjustment. Tax collected under provisional assessment is not treated as retention without authority of law merely because final assessment is delayed. A writ for immediate refund was therefore not available, and the claim was limited to the statutory consequences under section 44.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2013 18:05:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173480" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (7) TMI 343 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156453</link>
      <description>Section 44 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, read with rules 43(2) and 44, provides the exclusive scheme for refund or adjustment of excess tax after final assessment or on receipt of an appellate or revisional order. If the assessing authority does not act within ninety days, the taxpayer&#039;s statutory remedy is interest at six per cent per annum on the refundable amount until payment or adjustment. Tax collected under provisional assessment is not treated as retention without authority of law merely because final assessment is delayed. A writ for immediate refund was therefore not available, and the claim was limited to the statutory consequences under section 44.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156453</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>