<?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>2018 (2) TMI 1431 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356010</link>
    <description>The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a dispute over the filing of separate &#039;F&#039; Forms for each tax period. The rejection of the petitioner&#039;s forms due to an alleged delay was deemed unjustified as there was no specific time limitation prescribed under CST Rules. The Court invalidated the demand raised against the petitioner and quashed the impugned order dated 29.4.2014, without awarding any costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:00:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510077" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1431 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356010</link>
      <description>The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a dispute over the filing of separate &#039;F&#039; Forms for each tax period. The rejection of the petitioner&#039;s forms due to an alleged delay was deemed unjustified as there was no specific time limitation prescribed under CST Rules. The Court invalidated the demand raised against the petitioner and quashed the impugned order dated 29.4.2014, without awarding any costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356010</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>