<?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 (10) TMI 1020 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349865</link>
    <description>The court held that Section 9(2)(g) of the DVAT Act violated Article 14 by treating bona fide and non-bona fide purchasing dealers alike. It read down the provision to exclude bona fide dealers from penalties, protecting their right to claim Input Tax Credit. Default assessment orders against the petitioners were set aside, directing the Department to pursue defaulting selling dealers for tax recovery. The writ petitions were disposed of without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2019 09:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=493628" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 1020 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349865</link>
      <description>The court held that Section 9(2)(g) of the DVAT Act violated Article 14 by treating bona fide and non-bona fide purchasing dealers alike. It read down the provision to exclude bona fide dealers from penalties, protecting their right to claim Input Tax Credit. Default assessment orders against the petitioners were set aside, directing the Department to pursue defaulting selling dealers for tax recovery. The writ petitions were disposed of without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349865</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>