https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156845 The Kerala HC held that the Coffee Board's contingency deposit from pool sale dealers was valid, as the Coffee Act did not bar provision for a contingent tax liability and the arrangement fell within the Board's incidental and ancillary powers. Refund was refused in writ jurisdiction because entitlement depended on disputed facts and the dealers' conduct, including acquiescence. Although the Court accepted that sales tax was collected after the levy point was amended, no refund direction was made because the affidavits showed the amounts had already been remitted to the State and nothing remained with the Board. en-us Fri, 07 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:54:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156845 The Kerala HC held that the Coffee Board's contingency deposit from pool sale dealers was valid, as the Coffee Act did not bar provision for a contingent tax liability and the arrangement fell within the Board's incidental and ancillary powers. Refund was refused in writ jurisdiction because entitlement depended on disputed facts and the dealers' conduct, including acquiescence. Although the Court accepted that sales tax was collected after the levy point was amended, no refund direction was made because the affidavits showed the amounts had already been remitted to the State and nothing remained with the Board. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 07 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156845