<?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 (3) TMI 1020 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164821</link>
    <description>Amnesty under section 23B required strict compliance with the mandatory condition of paying the reduced tax within the prescribed time, and failure to do so defeated entitlement to the scheme. The existence of a pending rectification application did not relax that statutory deadline. The provision also preserved the assessee&#039;s ability to pursue assessment or demand disputes separately through appeal, revision, or rectification, with any tax paid under the amnesty scheme being recoverable by refund where applicable. On these facts, the assessee could not claim amnesty benefit, and the direction to consider such benefit was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 May 2017 09:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354774" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 1020 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164821</link>
      <description>Amnesty under section 23B required strict compliance with the mandatory condition of paying the reduced tax within the prescribed time, and failure to do so defeated entitlement to the scheme. The existence of a pending rectification application did not relax that statutory deadline. The provision also preserved the assessee&#039;s ability to pursue assessment or demand disputes separately through appeal, revision, or rectification, with any tax paid under the amnesty scheme being recoverable by refund where applicable. On these facts, the assessee could not claim amnesty benefit, and the direction to consider such benefit was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164821</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>