<?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 (8) TMI 482 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158784</link>
    <description>Validity of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 check-post and penalty provisions was upheld because similar provisions had already been sustained in earlier decisions, so the constitutional challenge could not succeed. The penalty for a defective declaration form and related check-post non-compliance was also left undisturbed because the authorities had recorded a factual finding that the form was improperly filled, including an incorrect sales tax number, and the Court declined to reappraise that factual dispute in writ jurisdiction. The writ petition therefore failed, and the impugned penalty and connected orders remained in force.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Nov 2013 12:52:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=334812" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (8) TMI 482 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158784</link>
      <description>Validity of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 check-post and penalty provisions was upheld because similar provisions had already been sustained in earlier decisions, so the constitutional challenge could not succeed. The penalty for a defective declaration form and related check-post non-compliance was also left undisturbed because the authorities had recorded a factual finding that the form was improperly filled, including an incorrect sales tax number, and the Court declined to reappraise that factual dispute in writ jurisdiction. The writ petition therefore failed, and the impugned penalty and connected orders remained in force.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158784</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>