<?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>2017 (5) TMI 24 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342286</link>
    <description>Sale proceeds of mortgaged property were not treated as a garnishee debt payable by the petitioner to the defaulting dealer, but the statutory first charge already created on the dealer&#039;s property attached to the cash realised on sale. On that basis, departmental enforcement against the sale proceeds was sustained as recovery of the statutory charge, even though the petitioner had acted under mortgage and sale powers. The department was, however, confined to the principal tax liability with limited interest under the interim arrangement, and could not extend recovery to the higher statutory interest and penalty claimed in the facts of the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 May 2017 15:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=467200" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 24 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342286</link>
      <description>Sale proceeds of mortgaged property were not treated as a garnishee debt payable by the petitioner to the defaulting dealer, but the statutory first charge already created on the dealer&#039;s property attached to the cash realised on sale. On that basis, departmental enforcement against the sale proceeds was sustained as recovery of the statutory charge, even though the petitioner had acted under mortgage and sale powers. The department was, however, confined to the principal tax liability with limited interest under the interim arrangement, and could not extend recovery to the higher statutory interest and penalty claimed in the facts of the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342286</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>