<?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>2010 (4) TMI 975 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164176</link>
    <description>Penalties incurred under the repealed Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act remained enforceable after enactment of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act. The repeal did not extinguish prior liabilities because the later Act&#039;s saving provision preserved actions, penalties and remedies, while the Uttar Pradesh General Clauses Act continued such accrued liabilities absent a contrary intention. The corresponding penalty power under the later law further supported continuing enforceability. The penalty challenge was not examined on merits because a statutory appellate remedy was available, and the penalty order remained legally sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2014 10:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352808" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 975 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164176</link>
      <description>Penalties incurred under the repealed Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act remained enforceable after enactment of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act. The repeal did not extinguish prior liabilities because the later Act&#039;s saving provision preserved actions, penalties and remedies, while the Uttar Pradesh General Clauses Act continued such accrued liabilities absent a contrary intention. The corresponding penalty power under the later law further supported continuing enforceability. The penalty challenge was not examined on merits because a statutory appellate remedy was available, and the penalty order remained legally sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164176</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>