<?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 (6) TMI 352 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160338</link>
    <description>Sales tax exemption under a notification issued under section 8-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act depended on satisfaction of prescribed conditions, including certification by the competent industrial authority and qualification of the relevant investments as &quot;fixed assets.&quot; The assessing authority had jurisdiction to determine tax liability and examine whether those conditions were met; an erroneous disallowance within that authority is an error on merits, not a jurisdictional defect. In revenue matters, where a statutory appellate remedy exists, writ interference is generally unavailable unless the order is wholly without jurisdiction, natural justice is violated, or the statute is challenged as ultra vires. The assessment orders were therefore not open to writ review, and the statutory appeal had to be pursued.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Dec 2013 14:30:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=339443" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (6) TMI 352 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160338</link>
      <description>Sales tax exemption under a notification issued under section 8-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act depended on satisfaction of prescribed conditions, including certification by the competent industrial authority and qualification of the relevant investments as &quot;fixed assets.&quot; The assessing authority had jurisdiction to determine tax liability and examine whether those conditions were met; an erroneous disallowance within that authority is an error on merits, not a jurisdictional defect. In revenue matters, where a statutory appellate remedy exists, writ interference is generally unavailable unless the order is wholly without jurisdiction, natural justice is violated, or the statute is challenged as ultra vires. The assessment orders were therefore not open to writ review, and the statutory appeal had to be pursued.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160338</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>