<?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>2011 (1) TMI 609 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205844</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal by setting aside the CESTAT&#039;s order that refused to condone the delay in filing the original appeal. The court directed CESTAT to restore the appeal for disposal within three months. Despite the appellant having paid the entire tax, penalties and interest could still be recovered. However, since the liability to pay tax was disputed and already before CESTAT in another appeal, the court emphasized that the appellant is not liable to pay tax unless mandated by the statute. The court granted the appellant an opportunity to agitate their rights and clarified that the revenue could proceed to recover the legitimately due amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2014 17:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179345" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 609 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205844</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal by setting aside the CESTAT&#039;s order that refused to condone the delay in filing the original appeal. The court directed CESTAT to restore the appeal for disposal within three months. Despite the appellant having paid the entire tax, penalties and interest could still be recovered. However, since the liability to pay tax was disputed and already before CESTAT in another appeal, the court emphasized that the appellant is not liable to pay tax unless mandated by the statute. The court granted the appellant an opportunity to agitate their rights and clarified that the revenue could proceed to recover the legitimately due amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205844</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>