<?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>1997 (2) TMI 513 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158771</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act is discretionary and is not attracted by every statutory default; it requires blameworthy conduct such as deliberate, contumacious or conscious disregard of the obligation. On the admitted facts, delayed filing of monthly and annual returns and delayed remittance of tax made the default wilful, so penalty proceedings were justified. However, the case involved delayed compliance rather than tax evasion, and the assessee had later filed the returns and paid tax and interest. The penalty was therefore confined to the statutory maximum applicable to a non-quantifiable contravention, and the impugned orders were modified accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2013 18:10:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=334702" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (2) TMI 513 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158771</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act is discretionary and is not attracted by every statutory default; it requires blameworthy conduct such as deliberate, contumacious or conscious disregard of the obligation. On the admitted facts, delayed filing of monthly and annual returns and delayed remittance of tax made the default wilful, so penalty proceedings were justified. However, the case involved delayed compliance rather than tax evasion, and the assessee had later filed the returns and paid tax and interest. The penalty was therefore confined to the statutory maximum applicable to a non-quantifiable contravention, and the impugned orders were modified accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>