<?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 (10) TMI 627 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162185</link>
    <description>Section 8(4)(a) of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas for Consumption, Use or Sale Therein Act, 1979 was construed as permitting recovery of tax through multiple modes, including arrears of land revenue, attachment and sale, and proceedings before the Magistrate. The remedies were held to be cumulative rather than mutually exclusive, so authorities may proceed under one mode and adopt another until the demand is realised. The parallel recovery challenge therefore failed. An unsupported allegation that recovery proceedings harassed the managing director&#039;s family members also did not invalidate the action, as no factual foundation was shown and the petition was not filed in a personal capacity.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:44:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346639" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (10) TMI 627 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162185</link>
      <description>Section 8(4)(a) of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas for Consumption, Use or Sale Therein Act, 1979 was construed as permitting recovery of tax through multiple modes, including arrears of land revenue, attachment and sale, and proceedings before the Magistrate. The remedies were held to be cumulative rather than mutually exclusive, so authorities may proceed under one mode and adopt another until the demand is realised. The parallel recovery challenge therefore failed. An unsupported allegation that recovery proceedings harassed the managing director&#039;s family members also did not invalidate the action, as no factual foundation was shown and the petition was not filed in a personal capacity.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162185</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>