<?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>2013 (5) TMI 766 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167684</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was held unsustainable for a 1996 stock transfer where the goods were intercepted before the 20.03.2000 notification and the record showed movement by way of stock transfer. The Court applied earlier decisions and treated the blank or absent ST-18A declaration as insufficient, by itself, to attract penalty in a pre-notification stock transfer case. The Tax Board&#039;s order deleting the penalty was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 22:09:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=372651" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (5) TMI 766 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167684</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 78(5) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act was held unsustainable for a 1996 stock transfer where the goods were intercepted before the 20.03.2000 notification and the record showed movement by way of stock transfer. The Court applied earlier decisions and treated the blank or absent ST-18A declaration as insufficient, by itself, to attract penalty in a pre-notification stock transfer case. The Tax Board&#039;s order deleting the penalty was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167684</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>