<?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 (10) TMI 1112 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160937</link>
    <description>The court upheld the decision to quash penalty orders due to unreasonable delay, absence of mens rea for false representation, lack of vicarious liability for transferee, and non-amendment of the registration certificate. The penalty orders were deemed invalid, and the penalty amounts were directed to be refunded with interest. The appeal was dismissed without costs, considering the State&#039;s financial situation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Dec 2013 18:22:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340899" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 1112 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160937</link>
      <description>The court upheld the decision to quash penalty orders due to unreasonable delay, absence of mens rea for false representation, lack of vicarious liability for transferee, and non-amendment of the registration certificate. The penalty orders were deemed invalid, and the penalty amounts were directed to be refunded with interest. The appeal was dismissed without costs, considering the State&#039;s financial situation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160937</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>