<?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>2000 (7) TMI 940 -  ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160597</link>
    <description>The High Court held that penalty under section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act was not applicable as there was no deliberate false representation by the assessee in purchasing Gari Gola against form C. The Tribunal&#039;s findings showed no evidence of deliberate false representation, a necessary element for penalty under section 10(b) to apply. The revisions were dismissed, affirming that the penalty under section 10-A was not warranted in this case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2013 15:57:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (7) TMI 940 -  ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160597</link>
      <description>The High Court held that penalty under section 10-A of the Central Sales Tax Act was not applicable as there was no deliberate false representation by the assessee in purchasing Gari Gola against form C. The Tribunal&#039;s findings showed no evidence of deliberate false representation, a necessary element for penalty under section 10(b) to apply. The revisions were dismissed, affirming that the penalty under section 10-A was not warranted in this case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160597</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>