<?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>2003 (3) TMI 702 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163745</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petitions, ruling that the amendments to section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act by the Finance Act of 2000, including the insertion of sub-section (2B), had retrospective effect. The validation clause in section 120 of the Finance Act was upheld as valid, allowing for the imposition of interest on unpaid Central sales tax dues even for periods before May 12, 2000.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2014 15:06:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=351652" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 702 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163745</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petitions, ruling that the amendments to section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act by the Finance Act of 2000, including the insertion of sub-section (2B), had retrospective effect. The validation clause in section 120 of the Finance Act was upheld as valid, allowing for the imposition of interest on unpaid Central sales tax dues even for periods before May 12, 2000.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163745</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>