<?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>2004 (5) TMI 552 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162225</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 10-A may be levied by the authority competent to assess tax where the assessment has been transferred, particularly when jurisdictional objections were not timely raised and no failure of justice arose. Use of form C for goods outside the registration certificate, including chemicals, machinery parts and rubber rollers, constitutes false representation; prior departmental inaction does not by itself establish bona fide belief, supporting penalty. For printing ink used in job-work, liability depends on whether the processed goods were intended for sale by the third party. That factual issue requires a specific finding, so the ink-related penalty issue requires limited fresh determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2014 11:18:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346744" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 552 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162225</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 10-A may be levied by the authority competent to assess tax where the assessment has been transferred, particularly when jurisdictional objections were not timely raised and no failure of justice arose. Use of form C for goods outside the registration certificate, including chemicals, machinery parts and rubber rollers, constitutes false representation; prior departmental inaction does not by itself establish bona fide belief, supporting penalty. For printing ink used in job-work, liability depends on whether the processed goods were intended for sale by the third party. That factual issue requires a specific finding, so the ink-related penalty issue requires limited fresh determination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162225</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>