<?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 (1) TMI 138 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167859</link>
    <description>Section 62(5) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 required the 25% pre-deposit to be computed on the total demand of tax, interest and penalty, not merely on the additional demand created, and any amount already deposited could be adjusted toward compliance. The later amendment introduced by the Punjab Value Added Tax (Fourth Amendment) Ordinance, 2011 was prospective and did not apply where the Tribunal&#039;s order had already been passed. On that basis, the appeal was entitled to be heard on merits, and the contrary decision was distinguished because compliance with the statutory pre-deposit condition had not been established there.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2015 14:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=372988" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (1) TMI 138 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167859</link>
      <description>Section 62(5) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 required the 25% pre-deposit to be computed on the total demand of tax, interest and penalty, not merely on the additional demand created, and any amount already deposited could be adjusted toward compliance. The later amendment introduced by the Punjab Value Added Tax (Fourth Amendment) Ordinance, 2011 was prospective and did not apply where the Tribunal&#039;s order had already been passed. On that basis, the appeal was entitled to be heard on merits, and the contrary decision was distinguished because compliance with the statutory pre-deposit condition had not been established there.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167859</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>