<?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 (8) TMI 1124 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186306</link>
    <description>The court held that the petitioner, a Cooperative Society, was not liable to pay penal interest under Section 24(3) of the Act for belated remittance of differential tax. The court determined that the demand for interest was not legally sustainable based on the principles established by the Supreme Court. Consequently, the Writ Petition was allowed, the impugned order was quashed, and no costs were awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2016 10:34:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=441039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1124 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186306</link>
      <description>The court held that the petitioner, a Cooperative Society, was not liable to pay penal interest under Section 24(3) of the Act for belated remittance of differential tax. The court determined that the demand for interest was not legally sustainable based on the principles established by the Supreme Court. Consequently, the Writ Petition was allowed, the impugned order was quashed, and no costs were awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186306</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>