<?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>1998 (3) TMI 658 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159940</link>
    <description>Penal interest could not be levied for any period before assessment where liability to turnover tax was disputed in the returns and had not been admitted by the assessees. Because tax became payable only after completion of assessment, rejection of the returns, and issuance of demand notices, no enforceable default arose earlier. The demand for arrears of penal interest relating to the pre-assessment period was therefore unsustainable and was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Dec 2013 17:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338197" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (3) TMI 658 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159940</link>
      <description>Penal interest could not be levied for any period before assessment where liability to turnover tax was disputed in the returns and had not been admitted by the assessees. Because tax became payable only after completion of assessment, rejection of the returns, and issuance of demand notices, no enforceable default arose earlier. The demand for arrears of penal interest relating to the pre-assessment period was therefore unsustainable and was quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159940</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>