<?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>2003 (5) TMI 482 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161547</link>
    <description>Exemption granted during the assessment year took the dealer outside the charging provision from the date of exemption, so the assessing authority could not split the yearly composition assessment and levy turnover tax under section 6-B for the exempted period. The annual composition scheme under section 17(6) operates within the subsisting charging provision, and once exemption under section 8-A removes the charge, liability cannot be revived for that part of the year. The bifurcation of the assessment period and tax demand for the exempt period were therefore impermissible, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2014 16:26:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=344498" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (5) TMI 482 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161547</link>
      <description>Exemption granted during the assessment year took the dealer outside the charging provision from the date of exemption, so the assessing authority could not split the yearly composition assessment and levy turnover tax under section 6-B for the exempted period. The annual composition scheme under section 17(6) operates within the subsisting charging provision, and once exemption under section 8-A removes the charge, liability cannot be revived for that part of the year. The bifurcation of the assessment period and tax demand for the exempt period were therefore impermissible, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161547</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>