<?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 (1) TMI 715 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167897</link>
    <description>A cash-security requirement for issuance of declaration forms for coal imports by rail under section 8C(3A) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was upheld because the Commissioner&#039;s general order was within statutory power and the amount fixed had a reasonable nexus with the likely tax liability. The court considered coal a notified commodity and relied on the rise in coal prices, freight, and selling prices, as well as the fact that a similar security for coal imports by road had already been sustained. The security of Rs. 120 per metric ton was found neither arbitrary nor confiscatory, and the writ petition challenging the circular was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2015 18:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373026" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (1) TMI 715 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167897</link>
      <description>A cash-security requirement for issuance of declaration forms for coal imports by rail under section 8C(3A) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was upheld because the Commissioner&#039;s general order was within statutory power and the amount fixed had a reasonable nexus with the likely tax liability. The court considered coal a notified commodity and relied on the rise in coal prices, freight, and selling prices, as well as the fact that a similar security for coal imports by road had already been sustained. The security of Rs. 120 per metric ton was found neither arbitrary nor confiscatory, and the writ petition challenging the circular was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167897</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>