<?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 (4) TMI 544 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162179</link>
    <description>Excess tax collected under the Central Sales Tax Act may be forfeited under section 46A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act when the collection is unlawful. Rule 31D operates as a reimbursement mechanism so the Government does not retain the amount as a substantive beneficiary, but holds it until the buyer seeks repayment. The forfeiture and reimbursement framework was treated as a machinery provision aimed at preventing dealers from keeping sums not legally due and protecting buyers from unlawful collection. The mechanism was held to be consistent with the CST scheme, as it does not create an unauthorised substantive levy and reflects the policy against unjust enrichment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2014 14:23:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346622" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 544 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162179</link>
      <description>Excess tax collected under the Central Sales Tax Act may be forfeited under section 46A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act when the collection is unlawful. Rule 31D operates as a reimbursement mechanism so the Government does not retain the amount as a substantive beneficiary, but holds it until the buyer seeks repayment. The forfeiture and reimbursement framework was treated as a machinery provision aimed at preventing dealers from keeping sums not legally due and protecting buyers from unlawful collection. The mechanism was held to be consistent with the CST scheme, as it does not create an unauthorised substantive levy and reflects the policy against unjust enrichment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162179</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>