<?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 (2) TMI 1317 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165965</link>
    <description>A fiscal penalty for non-filing of returns and non-payment of tax falls within the State&#039;s taxing competence under Entry 54 because the power to tax includes ancillary measures for assessment, collection and recovery. Section 72(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act was also upheld as neither arbitrary nor confiscatory, as it served to enforce self-assessment, timely filing and prompt remittance of tax and was treated as a civil liability protecting public revenue. Although the provision did not expressly require notice or hearing, the rule of audi alteram partem was read into it because of the serious civil consequences, so show-cause notice and hearing remained necessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2014 08:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363424" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 1317 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165965</link>
      <description>A fiscal penalty for non-filing of returns and non-payment of tax falls within the State&#039;s taxing competence under Entry 54 because the power to tax includes ancillary measures for assessment, collection and recovery. Section 72(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act was also upheld as neither arbitrary nor confiscatory, as it served to enforce self-assessment, timely filing and prompt remittance of tax and was treated as a civil liability protecting public revenue. Although the provision did not expressly require notice or hearing, the rule of audi alteram partem was read into it because of the serious civil consequences, so show-cause notice and hearing remained necessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165965</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>