<?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 (9) TMI 755 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162461</link>
    <description>Writ relief under Article 226 may be refused where the petitioner suppresses material facts and appears to engage in forum shopping; the Court found the non-disclosure of a pending and later withdrawn tribunal appeal fatal to entertainment of the petition. Detention of goods in transit was also upheld as within statutory jurisdiction, because the power under the Tamil Nadu sales tax law extends to inspecting documents, verifying the genuineness of the transaction, and preventing tax evasion; a bare assertion that no sale occurred in Tamil Nadu did not invalidate the detention. The challenge failed and costs were imposed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:17:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=347397" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (9) TMI 755 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162461</link>
      <description>Writ relief under Article 226 may be refused where the petitioner suppresses material facts and appears to engage in forum shopping; the Court found the non-disclosure of a pending and later withdrawn tribunal appeal fatal to entertainment of the petition. Detention of goods in transit was also upheld as within statutory jurisdiction, because the power under the Tamil Nadu sales tax law extends to inspecting documents, verifying the genuineness of the transaction, and preventing tax evasion; a bare assertion that no sale occurred in Tamil Nadu did not invalidate the detention. The challenge failed and costs were imposed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162461</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>