<?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 (3) TMI 1190 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191269</link>
    <description>Penalty could not be collected, and the vehicle and goods could not be detained in transit, without a prior written order authorising such action. The record did not show that an order imposing penalty had been passed or served before detention and collection, so the procedure was not complied with. The resulting seizure-related action was therefore contrary to the governing process and unlawful. The amount collected was directed to be refunded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:49:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=463259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 1190 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191269</link>
      <description>Penalty could not be collected, and the vehicle and goods could not be detained in transit, without a prior written order authorising such action. The record did not show that an order imposing penalty had been passed or served before detention and collection, so the procedure was not complied with. The resulting seizure-related action was therefore contrary to the governing process and unlawful. The amount collected was directed to be refunded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191269</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>