<?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 (1) TMI 1109 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164398</link>
    <description>Section 15B of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 permits recovery steps only within its stated scope and does not authorise attachment of a person&#039;s self-acquired immovable property merely because the defaulting firm&#039;s partner is that person&#039;s spouse. The notice also contained no finding that the property belonged to a Hindu undivided family, and the taxpayer&#039;s claim that the property was self-acquired was undisputed. Even if the spouse were part of a Hindu undivided family, recovery could be directed only against family property, not separate personal property. The recovery notices were therefore quashed, while the authorities were left free to proceed in accordance with law after proper enquiry.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353733" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 1109 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164398</link>
      <description>Section 15B of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 permits recovery steps only within its stated scope and does not authorise attachment of a person&#039;s self-acquired immovable property merely because the defaulting firm&#039;s partner is that person&#039;s spouse. The notice also contained no finding that the property belonged to a Hindu undivided family, and the taxpayer&#039;s claim that the property was self-acquired was undisputed. Even if the spouse were part of a Hindu undivided family, recovery could be directed only against family property, not separate personal property. The recovery notices were therefore quashed, while the authorities were left free to proceed in accordance with law after proper enquiry.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164398</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>