<?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>2011 (7) TMI 1029 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165456</link>
    <description>The court held in favor of the petitioner, a company based in Haryana, in a case concerning the deduction of entry tax from its bills by M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL) and its subsidiary. The court ruled that the respondents, as importers of goods into Bihar, were solely liable for the entry tax under the Bihar Entry Tax Act, 1993. It was determined that the respondents had no authority to deduct the entry tax from the petitioner&#039;s bills, and the court restrained them from doing so. Additionally, the court found the writ petition maintainable despite the existence of an arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties, as the dispute involved state authorities not party to the arbitration agreement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2014 08:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=359902" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 1029 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165456</link>
      <description>The court held in favor of the petitioner, a company based in Haryana, in a case concerning the deduction of entry tax from its bills by M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL) and its subsidiary. The court ruled that the respondents, as importers of goods into Bihar, were solely liable for the entry tax under the Bihar Entry Tax Act, 1993. It was determined that the respondents had no authority to deduct the entry tax from the petitioner&#039;s bills, and the court restrained them from doing so. Additionally, the court found the writ petition maintainable despite the existence of an arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties, as the dispute involved state authorities not party to the arbitration agreement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165456</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>