<?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 795 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343057</link>
    <description>Registration certificates cancelled for non-filing of returns under the Gujarat VAT Act were directed to be restored after the dealer cured the default by filing the returns, paying tax with interest, and paying the penalty. The cancellation had rested only on that non-filing default, and no separate allegation such as tax evasion was shown. The appellate authority could not rely on grounds outside the cancellation order, and the Tribunal&#039;s view that restoration should follow was found to disclose no legal error. The Gujarat HC upheld the direction restoring the registrations and rejected the State&#039;s challenge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2018 17:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=468974" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 795 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343057</link>
      <description>Registration certificates cancelled for non-filing of returns under the Gujarat VAT Act were directed to be restored after the dealer cured the default by filing the returns, paying tax with interest, and paying the penalty. The cancellation had rested only on that non-filing default, and no separate allegation such as tax evasion was shown. The appellate authority could not rely on grounds outside the cancellation order, and the Tribunal&#039;s view that restoration should follow was found to disclose no legal error. The Gujarat HC upheld the direction restoring the registrations and rejected the State&#039;s challenge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343057</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>