<?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>2009 (6) TMI 973 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173226</link>
    <description>An incomplete Form 38 under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act can justify seizure where a material column linking the declaration to the specific consignment, such as bill, challan or invoice particulars, is left blank and the omission appears deliberate. The Court also reiterated that detention or seizure under Section 50 requires a recorded, reasoned finding that the goods were being transported in an attempt to evade assessment or tax payment; that condition was satisfied on the facts. A circular relied on by the importer did not apply to the missing particulars, and the goods were not exempt merely because they were intended as raw material. The seizure and reduced security demand were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2017 09:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=396596" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 973 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173226</link>
      <description>An incomplete Form 38 under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act can justify seizure where a material column linking the declaration to the specific consignment, such as bill, challan or invoice particulars, is left blank and the omission appears deliberate. The Court also reiterated that detention or seizure under Section 50 requires a recorded, reasoned finding that the goods were being transported in an attempt to evade assessment or tax payment; that condition was satisfied on the facts. A circular relied on by the importer did not apply to the missing particulars, and the goods were not exempt merely because they were intended as raw material. The seizure and reduced security demand were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173226</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>