<?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 (12) TMI 621 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159892</link>
    <description>Compliance with the permit and declaration requirements for notified goods under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 and the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941 was mandatory, and a transit pass under the entry-tax law did not cure non-compliance. The seizure was therefore held valid and lawful because the applicants had not obtained the required permits or countersigned declaration. Breach of the transport restrictions also justified penalty proceedings, but the penalty valuation had to rest on a reasoned basis and reflect proportionality. The penalty was upheld in principle, but its quantum was reduced and excess recovery was directed to be refunded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:40:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338026" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (12) TMI 621 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159892</link>
      <description>Compliance with the permit and declaration requirements for notified goods under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 and the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941 was mandatory, and a transit pass under the entry-tax law did not cure non-compliance. The seizure was therefore held valid and lawful because the applicants had not obtained the required permits or countersigned declaration. Breach of the transport restrictions also justified penalty proceedings, but the penalty valuation had to rest on a reasoned basis and reflect proportionality. The penalty was upheld in principle, but its quantum was reduced and excess recovery was directed to be refunded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159892</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>