<?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 (11) TMI 215 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267406</link>
    <description>Section 49 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act was treated as a machinery provision designed to prevent tax evasion on notified goods and to support effective levy enforcement. The Kerala HC noted that it applies only in specified cases and includes safeguards such as notice, hearing, and release on proof of bona fides, keeping it closely tied to the charging and enforcement scheme. Applying the presumption of constitutionality and the wider latitude available in fiscal legislation, the Court rejected challenges based on legislative competence, arbitrariness, and alleged violation of free trade and personal rights, and upheld the provision as valid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2015 10:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=404307" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 215 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267406</link>
      <description>Section 49 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act was treated as a machinery provision designed to prevent tax evasion on notified goods and to support effective levy enforcement. The Kerala HC noted that it applies only in specified cases and includes safeguards such as notice, hearing, and release on proof of bona fides, keeping it closely tied to the charging and enforcement scheme. Applying the presumption of constitutionality and the wider latitude available in fiscal legislation, the Court rejected challenges based on legislative competence, arbitrariness, and alleged violation of free trade and personal rights, and upheld the provision as valid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267406</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>