<?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 (5) TMI 622 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162291</link>
    <description>Detention of a goods vehicle and transported goods under section 28-A(3B) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act is lawful only when further verification is needed for the very consignment intercepted or for a detected contravention relating to that transaction. The power cannot be extended to investigate suspected irregularities in earlier, unrelated dealings, nor can it justify prolonged detention where the accompanying documents are not shown to be defective. Because the respondents relied on suspicions about prior transactions rather than any defect in the intercepted consignment&#039;s documents, the continued detention had no legal basis and was an unreasonable interference with business. The detention and extension endorsements were therefore quashed and release of the vehicles and goods was directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Feb 2014 12:43:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346983" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 622 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162291</link>
      <description>Detention of a goods vehicle and transported goods under section 28-A(3B) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act is lawful only when further verification is needed for the very consignment intercepted or for a detected contravention relating to that transaction. The power cannot be extended to investigate suspected irregularities in earlier, unrelated dealings, nor can it justify prolonged detention where the accompanying documents are not shown to be defective. Because the respondents relied on suspicions about prior transactions rather than any defect in the intercepted consignment&#039;s documents, the continued detention had no legal basis and was an unreasonable interference with business. The detention and extension endorsements were therefore quashed and release of the vehicles and goods was directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162291</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>