<?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 (7) TMI 366 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329768</link>
    <description>The appellate court held that the controversy under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act required reconsideration because a relevant communication had not been placed before the Single Judge and the record was incomplete. Without examining the merits of the tax liability, it set aside the Single Judge&#039;s order as well as the assessment, demand notice and attachment orders, and remanded the matter for fresh decision. The parties are to be heard afresh and the dispute decided in accordance with law on a fuller record.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2016 17:14:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=434405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 366 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329768</link>
      <description>The appellate court held that the controversy under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act required reconsideration because a relevant communication had not been placed before the Single Judge and the record was incomplete. Without examining the merits of the tax liability, it set aside the Single Judge&#039;s order as well as the assessment, demand notice and attachment orders, and remanded the matter for fresh decision. The parties are to be heard afresh and the dispute decided in accordance with law on a fuller record.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329768</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>