<?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>2001 (3) TMI 993 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160539</link>
    <description>A transit-control proviso under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act was upheld as a valid ancillary measure to prevent tax evasion. The Court held that a rebuttable presumption arising from failure to produce prescribed documents was a rule of evidence, not an irrebuttable liability, and therefore fell within the State&#039;s legislative competence without offending the right to trade or freedom of commerce. The writ petition challenging detention and penalty action was also declined because an effective statutory appellate remedy was available and no exceptional ground justified bypassing it. The constitutional challenge failed, and the petitioner was left to pursue the statutory appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2013 17:58:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340028" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (3) TMI 993 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160539</link>
      <description>A transit-control proviso under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act was upheld as a valid ancillary measure to prevent tax evasion. The Court held that a rebuttable presumption arising from failure to produce prescribed documents was a rule of evidence, not an irrebuttable liability, and therefore fell within the State&#039;s legislative competence without offending the right to trade or freedom of commerce. The writ petition challenging detention and penalty action was also declined because an effective statutory appellate remedy was available and no exceptional ground justified bypassing it. The constitutional challenge failed, and the petitioner was left to pursue the statutory appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160539</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>