<?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>2015 (1) TMI 592 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255393</link>
    <description>Goods detained for incomplete Form JJ particulars were directed to be released on payment of the tax demanded, while the compounding fee claim was not finally decided and was left open for later adjudication. The document reflects that detention followed interception of the vehicle on the ground of incomplete transport particulars, but release was permitted against tax payment without determining the enforceability of the compounding fee at that stage.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2015 13:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=374000" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 592 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255393</link>
      <description>Goods detained for incomplete Form JJ particulars were directed to be released on payment of the tax demanded, while the compounding fee claim was not finally decided and was left open for later adjudication. The document reflects that detention followed interception of the vehicle on the ground of incomplete transport particulars, but release was permitted against tax payment without determining the enforceability of the compounding fee at that stage.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255393</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>