<?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 (2) TMI 458 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167997</link>
    <description>Where an appellate authority reduces a sales tax assessment, the earlier demand cannot continue unchanged; the authorities must complete the consequential reassessment and issue a fresh demand before relying on recovery proceedings. The text also states that reconveyance of property purchased in tax recovery may still be granted on equitable grounds despite delay, particularly where no third-party rights have intervened and the Government itself purchased the property. It further notes that an illegality arose because property recoverable for Central sales tax dues should have been purchased in the name of the Central Government, not the State Government. On those facts, reconveyance was to follow payment of the reassessed dues, statutory interest, and expenses.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2015 11:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373126" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (2) TMI 458 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167997</link>
      <description>Where an appellate authority reduces a sales tax assessment, the earlier demand cannot continue unchanged; the authorities must complete the consequential reassessment and issue a fresh demand before relying on recovery proceedings. The text also states that reconveyance of property purchased in tax recovery may still be granted on equitable grounds despite delay, particularly where no third-party rights have intervened and the Government itself purchased the property. It further notes that an illegality arose because property recoverable for Central sales tax dues should have been purchased in the name of the Central Government, not the State Government. On those facts, reconveyance was to follow payment of the reassessed dues, statutory interest, and expenses.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167997</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>