<?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>1992 (12) TMI 204 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157088</link>
    <description>Section 9-B(3) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 was treated as a penalty provision applicable only when a registered dealer realises tax in excess of the amount legally payable at the time of collection. Collections made under a notification then in force were not treated as excess realisation merely because the notification was later invalidated, so penalty was not leviable. However, the amount could not be retained by the dealer: applying restitution, unjust enrichment, article 265 of the Constitution and section 72 of the Contract Act, the collected sum was held to be returnable to the State rather than kept by the dealer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:06:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174113" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (12) TMI 204 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157088</link>
      <description>Section 9-B(3) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 was treated as a penalty provision applicable only when a registered dealer realises tax in excess of the amount legally payable at the time of collection. Collections made under a notification then in force were not treated as excess realisation merely because the notification was later invalidated, so penalty was not leviable. However, the amount could not be retained by the dealer: applying restitution, unjust enrichment, article 265 of the Constitution and section 72 of the Contract Act, the collected sum was held to be returnable to the State rather than kept by the dealer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157088</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>