<?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>2006 (10) TMI 405 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162962</link>
    <description>Interest under section 23(3A) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 was payable on the differential tax arising from the omission of taxable turnover from the prior year&#039;s return under the compounding scheme. The return did not include the purchase turnover of old gold, although the accounts disclosed it, and the subsequent year&#039;s compounded tax was computed on that return, creating a shortfall. Section 23(3A) applies where turnover is omitted from a return or escapes assessment, and interest runs from the date the tax would have become due had the turnover been correctly disclosed. The revisional authority was therefore justified in restoring the interest levy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2014 14:27:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=349046" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (10) TMI 405 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162962</link>
      <description>Interest under section 23(3A) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 was payable on the differential tax arising from the omission of taxable turnover from the prior year&#039;s return under the compounding scheme. The return did not include the purchase turnover of old gold, although the accounts disclosed it, and the subsequent year&#039;s compounded tax was computed on that return, creating a shortfall. Section 23(3A) applies where turnover is omitted from a return or escapes assessment, and interest runs from the date the tax would have become due had the turnover been correctly disclosed. The revisional authority was therefore justified in restoring the interest levy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162962</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>