<?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>2002 (11) TMI 756 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161564</link>
    <description>A circular under the Bihar Finance Act and Bihar Sales Tax Rules was found invalid to the extent it required refund of sales tax collected from a purchasing dealer to be pursued only through the selling dealer, because the procedure was cumbersome, delayed relief, and failed where the seller would not return the amount or its assessment was already complete. Where exemption for the relevant period was admitted and tax had been collected from the purchasing dealer and deposited with the State, the purchasing dealer retained substantive entitlement to refund or adjustment. The competent authority was required to consider refund after notice to the selling dealer and verification of collection and deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2014 17:58:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=344515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (11) TMI 756 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161564</link>
      <description>A circular under the Bihar Finance Act and Bihar Sales Tax Rules was found invalid to the extent it required refund of sales tax collected from a purchasing dealer to be pursued only through the selling dealer, because the procedure was cumbersome, delayed relief, and failed where the seller would not return the amount or its assessment was already complete. Where exemption for the relevant period was admitted and tax had been collected from the purchasing dealer and deposited with the State, the purchasing dealer retained substantive entitlement to refund or adjustment. The competent authority was required to consider refund after notice to the selling dealer and verification of collection and deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161564</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>