<?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>1995 (10) TMI 215 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158496</link>
    <description>The expression &quot;balance&quot; in the pre-deposit rule was construed to mean the entire outstanding demand. Where an appeal challenged an assessment order imposing both tax and penalty, the amount payable for admission could not be bifurcated by applying separate percentages to tax and penalty components. The statutory pre-deposit requirement therefore applied to the total balance due from the dealer, and the demand had to be computed on the full outstanding amount rather than split up for appeal admission.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2013 16:54:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=333759" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (10) TMI 215 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158496</link>
      <description>The expression &quot;balance&quot; in the pre-deposit rule was construed to mean the entire outstanding demand. Where an appeal challenged an assessment order imposing both tax and penalty, the amount payable for admission could not be bifurcated by applying separate percentages to tax and penalty components. The statutory pre-deposit requirement therefore applied to the total balance due from the dealer, and the demand had to be computed on the full outstanding amount rather than split up for appeal admission.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158496</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>