<?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 (4) TMI 686 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167710</link>
    <description>Interest on additional purchase tax liability was treated as accruing only after the liability was quantified in assessment, not from the date of the underlying transaction or return filing. The challenge to the purchase tax levy itself was not effectively pursued in light of binding precedent, leaving interest as the only live issue. On that basis, interest for the period before the assessment order could not be demanded, and relief was granted to the extent of deleting that pre-assessment interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 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=372816" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 686 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167710</link>
      <description>Interest on additional purchase tax liability was treated as accruing only after the liability was quantified in assessment, not from the date of the underlying transaction or return filing. The challenge to the purchase tax levy itself was not effectively pursued in light of binding precedent, leaving interest as the only live issue. On that basis, interest for the period before the assessment order could not be demanded, and relief was granted to the extent of deleting that pre-assessment interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167710</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>