<?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>2007 (3) TMI 693 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163004</link>
    <description>Penalty cannot be imposed on surcharge, additional surcharge or additional sales tax unless a substantive statutory provision expressly authorises such levy. Applying the principle that penalty must rest on clear legal authority, the Madras HC treated the absence of such provision as fatal to the penalty demand. The court extended the earlier binding view on additional tax components to these levies and set aside the penalty as not legally sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2014 12:18:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=349117" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (3) TMI 693 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163004</link>
      <description>Penalty cannot be imposed on surcharge, additional surcharge or additional sales tax unless a substantive statutory provision expressly authorises such levy. Applying the principle that penalty must rest on clear legal authority, the Madras HC treated the absence of such provision as fatal to the penalty demand. The court extended the earlier binding view on additional tax components to these levies and set aside the penalty as not legally sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163004</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>