<?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>2011 (10) TMI 562 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168036</link>
    <description>Refund claims under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act must be pursued within a reasonable time, and a writ court will not grant mandamus for refund and interest where the assessee remains inactive for years. Although section 33B contemplated refund when an amount became due, the Court treated the delayed claim as hit by laches and noted that time-barred or unenforceable claims are not legally recoverable. The existence of pending tax arrears and the public interest in tax recovery also weighed against discretionary relief. The refund and interest sought in writ jurisdiction were therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 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=373235" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (10) TMI 562 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168036</link>
      <description>Refund claims under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act must be pursued within a reasonable time, and a writ court will not grant mandamus for refund and interest where the assessee remains inactive for years. Although section 33B contemplated refund when an amount became due, the Court treated the delayed claim as hit by laches and noted that time-barred or unenforceable claims are not legally recoverable. The existence of pending tax arrears and the public interest in tax recovery also weighed against discretionary relief. The refund and interest sought in writ jurisdiction were therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168036</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>