<?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 (9) TMI 573 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163286</link>
    <description>Section 15 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 provides for joint and several liability of transferor and transferee for unpaid tax, penalty, or other dues remaining outstanding at the time of transfer, and deems the transferee to be the dealer for recovery purposes. On the facts described, the transferee had taken the business assets on lease and remained in possession of the land, plant, and machinery, bringing it within the recovery net for arrears. The sales tax dues were also treated as having priority over the secured creditor&#039;s interest, so proceedings under the Securitisation Act did not displace recovery of public dues under the sales tax law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2014 13:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=350255" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (9) TMI 573 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163286</link>
      <description>Section 15 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 provides for joint and several liability of transferor and transferee for unpaid tax, penalty, or other dues remaining outstanding at the time of transfer, and deems the transferee to be the dealer for recovery purposes. On the facts described, the transferee had taken the business assets on lease and remained in possession of the land, plant, and machinery, bringing it within the recovery net for arrears. The sales tax dues were also treated as having priority over the secured creditor&#039;s interest, so proceedings under the Securitisation Act did not displace recovery of public dues under the sales tax law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163286</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>