<?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>2016 (2) TMI 859 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272154</link>
    <description>The court partially allowed the appeals, confirming the interest levy under Section 36(1) of the KVAT Act, 2003 but setting aside the penalty imposition under Section 72(2). The court directed a fresh assessment by the Assessing Officer, emphasizing the need for proper evaluation of objections and providing both parties with an opportunity to be heard. The Assessing Officer was instructed to promptly resolve the matter within three months.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2017 16:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417886" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 859 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272154</link>
      <description>The court partially allowed the appeals, confirming the interest levy under Section 36(1) of the KVAT Act, 2003 but setting aside the penalty imposition under Section 72(2). The court directed a fresh assessment by the Assessing Officer, emphasizing the need for proper evaluation of objections and providing both parties with an opportunity to be heard. The Assessing Officer was instructed to promptly resolve the matter within three months.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272154</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>