<?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>1999 (12) TMI 835 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160154</link>
    <description>Under the amended penalty provision, mere stock transfer or consignment of notified goods to a dealer&#039;s own depots outside the State did not amount to &quot;sale or otherwise disposal&quot; because the phrase required an act transferring title to another person. Penalty could therefore arise only if an actual sale or legally cognisable disposal was established. The provision also tied the quantum of penalty to tax that would have been payable on a sale in the State; where the dealer held an eligibility certificate and no sales tax liability arose, penalty could not be levied for that period. The later assessment year attracted deletion of penalty, while the earlier year required fresh factual determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2013 17:17:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338784" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (12) TMI 835 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160154</link>
      <description>Under the amended penalty provision, mere stock transfer or consignment of notified goods to a dealer&#039;s own depots outside the State did not amount to &quot;sale or otherwise disposal&quot; because the phrase required an act transferring title to another person. Penalty could therefore arise only if an actual sale or legally cognisable disposal was established. The provision also tied the quantum of penalty to tax that would have been payable on a sale in the State; where the dealer held an eligibility certificate and no sales tax liability arose, penalty could not be levied for that period. The later assessment year attracted deletion of penalty, while the earlier year required fresh factual determination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160154</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>