<?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 1156 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330558</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 8 of the Tamil Nadu Tax on Luxuries in Hotels and Lodging Houses Act, 1981 requires the authority to identify the exact statutory default relied on, such as failure to file a return, failure to pay tax with the return, non-compliance with notice, or concealment/inaccurate particulars, and to record a clear finding that the default occurred without sufficient cause. A bare statement that tax was not paid in full, or a cursory rejection of the assessee&#039;s explanation, is insufficient. Because the assessment and revisional orders did not specify the precise clause or properly examine the explanation, the penalty lacked factual foundation and was held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2016 12:26:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=436664" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 1156 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330558</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 8 of the Tamil Nadu Tax on Luxuries in Hotels and Lodging Houses Act, 1981 requires the authority to identify the exact statutory default relied on, such as failure to file a return, failure to pay tax with the return, non-compliance with notice, or concealment/inaccurate particulars, and to record a clear finding that the default occurred without sufficient cause. A bare statement that tax was not paid in full, or a cursory rejection of the assessee&#039;s explanation, is insufficient. Because the assessment and revisional orders did not specify the precise clause or properly examine the explanation, the penalty lacked factual foundation and was held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330558</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>