<?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>1996 (5) TMI 395 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158746</link>
    <description>Interest was chargeable under section 10A of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 on unpaid turnover tax where the assessee knew its statutory liability but chose to withhold payment while contesting the levy. The interim injunction only restrained recovery by the authorities and did not bar voluntary payment by the assessee; furnishing bank guarantees for part of the disputed amount did not amount to discharge of the tax. The tribunal distinguished cases involving bona fide disclosure and payment under a court-authorised arrangement, and held that J.K. Synthetics did not apply on these facts. Interest on the unpaid turnover tax was therefore lawfully demandable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2013 15:37:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=334676" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (5) TMI 395 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158746</link>
      <description>Interest was chargeable under section 10A of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 on unpaid turnover tax where the assessee knew its statutory liability but chose to withhold payment while contesting the levy. The interim injunction only restrained recovery by the authorities and did not bar voluntary payment by the assessee; furnishing bank guarantees for part of the disputed amount did not amount to discharge of the tax. The tribunal distinguished cases involving bona fide disclosure and payment under a court-authorised arrangement, and held that J.K. Synthetics did not apply on these facts. Interest on the unpaid turnover tax was therefore lawfully demandable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158746</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>