<?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 (10) TMI 603 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333583</link>
    <description>Provisional attachment of a bank account under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2005 could not be sustained where the substantial disputed liability related to entry tax under the Gujarat Tax on Entry of Specified Goods into Local Areas Act, 2001 and the assessment remained pending. Section 45(1) of the VAT Act permits provisional attachment only for that statute&#039;s assessment or reassessment process, and the power could not be extended by implication to the separate entry tax enactment. The assessee&#039;s substantial deposit toward the estimated liability further weighed against continued attachment. The attachment order was therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=445142" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 603 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333583</link>
      <description>Provisional attachment of a bank account under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2005 could not be sustained where the substantial disputed liability related to entry tax under the Gujarat Tax on Entry of Specified Goods into Local Areas Act, 2001 and the assessment remained pending. Section 45(1) of the VAT Act permits provisional attachment only for that statute&#039;s assessment or reassessment process, and the power could not be extended by implication to the separate entry tax enactment. The assessee&#039;s substantial deposit toward the estimated liability further weighed against continued attachment. The attachment order was therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333583</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>