<?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>1997 (10) TMI 395 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179700</link>
    <description>Import of cement using Form C without first obtaining registration under the Central Sales Tax Act attracted penalty because the importer remained responsible for securing registration before seeking the concessional form. The authorities also contributed to the error by issuing Form C without verifying the registration position, so the default was not treated as wholly attributable to one side. On that factual basis, the penalty was reduced from Rs. 26,000 to Rs. 5,000.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2016 14:15:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=419349" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (10) TMI 395 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179700</link>
      <description>Import of cement using Form C without first obtaining registration under the Central Sales Tax Act attracted penalty because the importer remained responsible for securing registration before seeking the concessional form. The authorities also contributed to the error by issuing Form C without verifying the registration position, so the default was not treated as wholly attributable to one side. On that factual basis, the penalty was reduced from Rs. 26,000 to Rs. 5,000.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179700</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>