<?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>2015 (8) TMI 1355 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189634</link>
    <description>A retrospective amendment to the composition scheme under Section 7D of the U.P. Trade Tax Act permitted payment of a 3% composition fee in place of 1% for the relevant assessment years. Once the assessee exercised that option, the earlier tax consequence under the original scheme was displaced for those years. As the amended circular did not create an interest liability for the period before 28.10.2003, interest could not be levied on the balance 2% amount for that antecedent period. The governing principle is that a retrospective composition scheme replacing the earlier liability does not permit interest for a period not covered by the amended levy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2017 10:50:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=455436" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 1355 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189634</link>
      <description>A retrospective amendment to the composition scheme under Section 7D of the U.P. Trade Tax Act permitted payment of a 3% composition fee in place of 1% for the relevant assessment years. Once the assessee exercised that option, the earlier tax consequence under the original scheme was displaced for those years. As the amended circular did not create an interest liability for the period before 28.10.2003, interest could not be levied on the balance 2% amount for that antecedent period. The governing principle is that a retrospective composition scheme replacing the earlier liability does not permit interest for a period not covered by the amended levy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189634</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>