<?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 (4) TMI 1250 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166363</link>
    <description>The court quashed the penalty imposed under Section 47(6) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, stating that there were no conclusive findings of an attempt to evade tax. The court directed the release of the excavator loader to the petitioner and emphasized the need for clear proof of guilt for penalty imposition. The court found the writ petition maintainable despite the availability of an alternative remedy, as there were allegations of patent illegality.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2014 17:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=365497" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 1250 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166363</link>
      <description>The court quashed the penalty imposed under Section 47(6) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, stating that there were no conclusive findings of an attempt to evade tax. The court directed the release of the excavator loader to the petitioner and emphasized the need for clear proof of guilt for penalty imposition. The court found the writ petition maintainable despite the availability of an alternative remedy, as there were allegations of patent illegality.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166363</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>