<?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>2012 (12) TMI 953 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167740</link>
    <description>Subsisting tax arrears of a partnership concern with common partners can justify attachment of another firm&#039;s property where the liability remains unpaid, even if related arrears also arise in sister concerns; the Court distinguished private limited companies as separate legal entities but upheld attachment because the partnership liability itself was outstanding and a waiver request had not been granted. The challenge based on Revenue Recovery Act procedure also failed, as the record showed recovery steps had been taken and the attachment had been published in the District Gazette, so non-compliance was not established. The writ petition was therefore dismissed and the impugned attachment sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2015 08:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=372846" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 953 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167740</link>
      <description>Subsisting tax arrears of a partnership concern with common partners can justify attachment of another firm&#039;s property where the liability remains unpaid, even if related arrears also arise in sister concerns; the Court distinguished private limited companies as separate legal entities but upheld attachment because the partnership liability itself was outstanding and a waiver request had not been granted. The challenge based on Revenue Recovery Act procedure also failed, as the record showed recovery steps had been taken and the attachment had been published in the District Gazette, so non-compliance was not established. The writ petition was therefore dismissed and the impugned attachment sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167740</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>