<?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 (11) TMI 1195 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335177</link>
    <description>The Rajasthan High Court upheld the penalty imposed under Section 76(6) of the VAT Act due to incomplete VAT declaration forms at the time of interception. The court emphasized the necessity of fully completed forms, including the statutory requirement of punching, referencing Supreme Court judgments in D.P. Metals and Guljag Industries. The decision of the Tax Board to delete the penalty was reversed, and the orders of the AO and Dy. Com. (Appeals) were reinstated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:13:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=449510" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 1195 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335177</link>
      <description>The Rajasthan High Court upheld the penalty imposed under Section 76(6) of the VAT Act due to incomplete VAT declaration forms at the time of interception. The court emphasized the necessity of fully completed forms, including the statutory requirement of punching, referencing Supreme Court judgments in D.P. Metals and Guljag Industries. The decision of the Tax Board to delete the penalty was reversed, and the orders of the AO and Dy. Com. (Appeals) were reinstated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335177</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>