<?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 (1) TMI 591 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163612</link>
    <description>Failure to file sales tax returns attracted the statutory penalty under section 12(3)(a) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and the levy was not vitiated merely because the assessing authority and notices referred to section 12(3)(b). The court treated the wrong citation as a clerical error because the substantive default clearly fell within the applicable penal provision. The penalty and assessment were therefore upheld, and the writ challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:01:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=351367" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 591 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163612</link>
      <description>Failure to file sales tax returns attracted the statutory penalty under section 12(3)(a) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, and the levy was not vitiated merely because the assessing authority and notices referred to section 12(3)(b). The court treated the wrong citation as a clerical error because the substantive default clearly fell within the applicable penal provision. The penalty and assessment were therefore upheld, and the writ challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163612</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>