<?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 (9) TMI 911 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164045</link>
    <description>Interest under the sales tax regime is confined to tax admittedly payable in the return and not to a later-determined differential liability where the admitted tax was paid within time. Because the assessee had paid the concessional tax within the prescribed period and later discharged the assessed balance after assessment, the demand for interest on the differential amount was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2014 17:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352504" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 911 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164045</link>
      <description>Interest under the sales tax regime is confined to tax admittedly payable in the return and not to a later-determined differential liability where the admitted tax was paid within time. Because the assessee had paid the concessional tax within the prescribed period and later discharged the assessed balance after assessment, the demand for interest on the differential amount was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164045</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>