<?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>2009 (12) TMI 880 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164577</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 is not automatic merely because tax was collected at an excess rate and later remitted to the Government. The assessing authority must exercise discretion on the facts, and the decisive question is whether the dealer collected the amount and retained it as its own or collected it under a bona fide mistake without illegal retention. On the admitted facts, the assessee collected tax at the old rate without knowledge of the reduction, did not retain any amount, and paid the full sum over to the Government. The Tribunal&#039;s deletion of penalty was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2014 08:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354087" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (12) TMI 880 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164577</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 is not automatic merely because tax was collected at an excess rate and later remitted to the Government. The assessing authority must exercise discretion on the facts, and the decisive question is whether the dealer collected the amount and retained it as its own or collected it under a bona fide mistake without illegal retention. On the admitted facts, the assessee collected tax at the old rate without knowledge of the reduction, did not retain any amount, and paid the full sum over to the Government. The Tribunal&#039;s deletion of penalty was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164577</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>