<?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>2014 (11) TMI 1056 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180640</link>
    <description>The court allowed the revision, setting aside the Trade Tax Tribunal&#039;s penalty order under section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act. The court emphasized the requirement of proving mens rea under section 10(b) and the importance of genuine belief in representations made by dealers to avoid penalties. The judgment stressed that penal provisions require deliberate acts against the law, granting the accused dealer the benefit of the doubt.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:39:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=421924" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 1056 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180640</link>
      <description>The court allowed the revision, setting aside the Trade Tax Tribunal&#039;s penalty order under section 10A of the Central Sales Tax Act. The court emphasized the requirement of proving mens rea under section 10(b) and the importance of genuine belief in representations made by dealers to avoid penalties. The judgment stressed that penal provisions require deliberate acts against the law, granting the accused dealer the benefit of the doubt.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180640</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>