<?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 (10) TMI 1563 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369597</link>
    <description>Service tax dues could be recovered from a purchaser who took over the defaulting business on an &quot;as is where is and what is&quot; basis and obtained control over the mall and mortgaged assets, because the transfer was treated as extending beyond immovable property and fell within the proviso to Section 87(c) of the Finance Act, 1994. The High Court also accepted that the departmental notices and attachment were preceded by opportunities and that the statutory recovery scheme permitted action against the successor in these circumstances. The challenge based on the priority of secured creditors and denial of liability was rejected on the facts, and the recovery action was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Apr 2019 13:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=540103" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 1563 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369597</link>
      <description>Service tax dues could be recovered from a purchaser who took over the defaulting business on an &quot;as is where is and what is&quot; basis and obtained control over the mall and mortgaged assets, because the transfer was treated as extending beyond immovable property and fell within the proviso to Section 87(c) of the Finance Act, 1994. The High Court also accepted that the departmental notices and attachment were preceded by opportunities and that the statutory recovery scheme permitted action against the successor in these circumstances. The challenge based on the priority of secured creditors and denial of liability was rejected on the facts, and the recovery action was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369597</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>