<?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 (8) TMI 1088 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160732</link>
    <description>Section 78 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was examined as a check-post machinery provision aimed at preventing tax evasion in goods movement. The transporter&#039;s obligations to carry documents, stop at the check-post, produce papers, disclose information and permit inspection were treated as ancillary to levy and collection of sales tax and therefore within legislative competence. The Court also noted that penalty cannot follow technical or bona fide breaches without notice and opportunity. However, the value-linked penalty under section 78(5), fixed at 30% of the goods&#039; value rather than the tax evaded, was held excessive, disproportionate and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Dec 2013 17:49:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340458" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (8) TMI 1088 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160732</link>
      <description>Section 78 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was examined as a check-post machinery provision aimed at preventing tax evasion in goods movement. The transporter&#039;s obligations to carry documents, stop at the check-post, produce papers, disclose information and permit inspection were treated as ancillary to levy and collection of sales tax and therefore within legislative competence. The Court also noted that penalty cannot follow technical or bona fide breaches without notice and opportunity. However, the value-linked penalty under section 78(5), fixed at 30% of the goods&#039; value rather than the tax evaded, was held excessive, disproportionate and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160732</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>