<?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>2020 (1) TMI 414 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390801</link>
    <description>A bona fide purchasing dealer that paid VAT to the seller and received tax invoices could not be denied input tax credit or consequential interest merely because the selling dealer failed to file returns or remit the tax to the treasury. The court treated the purchaser&#039;s compliance in good faith as decisive and held that the statutory restriction could not be used to penalise one dealer for another dealer&#039;s default. The existence of alternative appellate and revisional remedies did not bar writ relief on these facts, where the impugned recovery was unwarranted and garnishee recovery had already been made. The assessment order and demand notice were quashed, with refund directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 May 2020 11:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=600051" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 414 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390801</link>
      <description>A bona fide purchasing dealer that paid VAT to the seller and received tax invoices could not be denied input tax credit or consequential interest merely because the selling dealer failed to file returns or remit the tax to the treasury. The court treated the purchaser&#039;s compliance in good faith as decisive and held that the statutory restriction could not be used to penalise one dealer for another dealer&#039;s default. The existence of alternative appellate and revisional remedies did not bar writ relief on these facts, where the impugned recovery was unwarranted and garnishee recovery had already been made. The assessment order and demand notice were quashed, with refund directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390801</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>