<?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>2013 (3) TMI 183 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221416</link>
    <description>Interim stay in a pending tax appeal should be assessed on prima facie merits and the likelihood of success, not on financial considerations alone. The dispute concerned treatment of permitting antennas on telecommunication towers as a transfer of the right to use goods under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008, with the assessee arguing that towers are not goods and that no transfer of any right in goods occurred. The High Court noted that the stay request had been decided mainly on financial grounds and indicated that the appeal required determination on merits. It also granted only limited interim protection, subject to security other than cash or bank guarantee, while directing expeditious disposal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2013 18:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=194771" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (3) TMI 183 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221416</link>
      <description>Interim stay in a pending tax appeal should be assessed on prima facie merits and the likelihood of success, not on financial considerations alone. The dispute concerned treatment of permitting antennas on telecommunication towers as a transfer of the right to use goods under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008, with the assessee arguing that towers are not goods and that no transfer of any right in goods occurred. The High Court noted that the stay request had been decided mainly on financial grounds and indicated that the appeal required determination on merits. It also granted only limited interim protection, subject to security other than cash or bank guarantee, while directing expeditious disposal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221416</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>