<?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 (12) TMI 1094 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164937</link>
    <description>A property purchased after sales tax arrears had arisen and after the repayment schedule had begun remained subject to an automatic statutory charge under sections 24(1) and 24(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The purchaser&#039;s plea of bona fide purchase was not accepted because no material was shown in writ proceedings to displace the revenue authority&#039;s case of prior liability and collusive transfer. The Court further held that a challenge to the charge and competing title claims could not be properly determined under Article 226 where civil remedies were available. The revenue authorities were therefore entitled to proceed with recovery against the property.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2014 10:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354953" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 1094 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164937</link>
      <description>A property purchased after sales tax arrears had arisen and after the repayment schedule had begun remained subject to an automatic statutory charge under sections 24(1) and 24(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The purchaser&#039;s plea of bona fide purchase was not accepted because no material was shown in writ proceedings to displace the revenue authority&#039;s case of prior liability and collusive transfer. The Court further held that a challenge to the charge and competing title claims could not be properly determined under Article 226 where civil remedies were available. The revenue authorities were therefore entitled to proceed with recovery against the property.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164937</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>