<?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>2014 (3) TMI 121 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244664</link>
    <description>Under the Kerala Value Added Tax compounding scheme, annual turnover remains the governing basis for composition tax, and it cannot be proportionately reduced by excluding the turnover of a branch that was later closed. The scheme does not permit bifurcation of the dealer&#039;s establishment to recast the prior year&#039;s turnover, because the earlier turnover formed part of the business during the relevant period. Rule 11(2) on applications not in order was also considered in context, but once the application was entertained and compounding was implemented, rejection on that procedural ground was not available. The computation based on the earlier year&#039;s turnover was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2014 10:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=347826" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 121 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244664</link>
      <description>Under the Kerala Value Added Tax compounding scheme, annual turnover remains the governing basis for composition tax, and it cannot be proportionately reduced by excluding the turnover of a branch that was later closed. The scheme does not permit bifurcation of the dealer&#039;s establishment to recast the prior year&#039;s turnover, because the earlier turnover formed part of the business during the relevant period. Rule 11(2) on applications not in order was also considered in context, but once the application was entertained and compounding was implemented, rejection on that procedural ground was not available. The computation based on the earlier year&#039;s turnover was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244664</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>