<?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 (3) TMI 330 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325146</link>
    <description>Electronic survey instruments were held to fall within the specific sales tax entry for survey instruments, because that entry was wide enough to cover survey instruments of all varieties, including electronic ones; the residuary entry for electronic goods applied only where no specific classification existed, so the lower residuary rate was rejected. Penalty for filing an incorrect return was not sustained on the unpaid balance because the assessee had a bona fide and arguable classification position and had consistently adopted it, so the return was not treated as incorrect to the assessee&#039;s knowledge or belief. The classification challenge failed, while partial relief was granted on penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 May 2016 16:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=419840" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 330 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325146</link>
      <description>Electronic survey instruments were held to fall within the specific sales tax entry for survey instruments, because that entry was wide enough to cover survey instruments of all varieties, including electronic ones; the residuary entry for electronic goods applied only where no specific classification existed, so the lower residuary rate was rejected. Penalty for filing an incorrect return was not sustained on the unpaid balance because the assessee had a bona fide and arguable classification position and had consistently adopted it, so the return was not treated as incorrect to the assessee&#039;s knowledge or belief. The classification challenge failed, while partial relief was granted on penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325146</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>