<?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 (4) TMI 150 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221954</link>
    <description>Detention of hand made soaps under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act was treated as warranting release on terms similar to an earlier case involving an identically placed manufacturer, because the facts and issues were materially comparable; release was therefore linked to adjudication and furnishing bank guarantee for the security demanded. Section 45 of the Act and Circular No. 47/06 were also read as conferring only an enabling power, not a mandatory duty, so the authorities were not required to purchase the goods in every case of detention based on undervaluation. The note concludes that release-related relief was appropriate, but compulsion to purchase the goods was not.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Apr 2013 20:47:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195306" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 150 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221954</link>
      <description>Detention of hand made soaps under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act was treated as warranting release on terms similar to an earlier case involving an identically placed manufacturer, because the facts and issues were materially comparable; release was therefore linked to adjudication and furnishing bank guarantee for the security demanded. Section 45 of the Act and Circular No. 47/06 were also read as conferring only an enabling power, not a mandatory duty, so the authorities were not required to purchase the goods in every case of detention based on undervaluation. The note concludes that release-related relief was appropriate, but compulsion to purchase the goods was not.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221954</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>