<?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>2008 (2) TMI 843 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163559</link>
    <description>Penalty for sales-tax evasion was sustained where business transactions were deliberately routed through a co-operative society to camouflage the real operators&#039; business and obtain exemption. The society had no genuine business activity, returned no sale turnover, produced no funds or bank account, and received commission for allowing use of its name. Joint and several liability applied because the business was conducted collectively in the society&#039;s name or association. Turnover could therefore be clubbed to determine tax liability and penalty, and each person&#039;s individual turnover being below the non-taxable limit did not defeat liability. Separate allocation of penalty affected recovery only, not the underlying joint liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2014 13:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=351202" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 843 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163559</link>
      <description>Penalty for sales-tax evasion was sustained where business transactions were deliberately routed through a co-operative society to camouflage the real operators&#039; business and obtain exemption. The society had no genuine business activity, returned no sale turnover, produced no funds or bank account, and received commission for allowing use of its name. Joint and several liability applied because the business was conducted collectively in the society&#039;s name or association. Turnover could therefore be clubbed to determine tax liability and penalty, and each person&#039;s individual turnover being below the non-taxable limit did not defeat liability. Separate allocation of penalty affected recovery only, not the underlying joint liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163559</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>