<?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>2005 (6) TMI 526 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161847</link>
    <description>Composition of tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act takes effect only when the assessing authority grants permission by a positive order; a pending application alone does not bind the dealer to composition. Revisional jurisdiction cannot be used to replace a regular assessment with composition-based liability unless the assessment order is itself illegal, improper, or irregular and prejudicial to the Revenue. Where the assessment was made on a lawful regular basis and the only lapse was non-disposal of the composition application, revision was not an available substitute. The revisional order was therefore unsustainable and was quashed, with refund directed in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2014 18:21:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=345364" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (6) TMI 526 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161847</link>
      <description>Composition of tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act takes effect only when the assessing authority grants permission by a positive order; a pending application alone does not bind the dealer to composition. Revisional jurisdiction cannot be used to replace a regular assessment with composition-based liability unless the assessment order is itself illegal, improper, or irregular and prejudicial to the Revenue. Where the assessment was made on a lawful regular basis and the only lapse was non-disposal of the composition application, revision was not an available substitute. The revisional order was therefore unsustainable and was quashed, with refund directed in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161847</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>