<?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>2021 (8) TMI 482 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410904</link>
    <description>Immovable property furnished as security for registration under the statutory bond and form could be proceeded against for recovery of the registered dealer&#039;s tax arrears. The bond expressly created a charge over the property in favour of the Government, and the description of the owner as a surety did not change the legal effect of the security. Because the property was bound by the terms of the security, the revenue authority had jurisdiction to enforce recovery against it even though the appellant was neither the registered dealer nor the tax defaulter. The challenge to attachment and recovery therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2021 08:41:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=652474" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 482 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410904</link>
      <description>Immovable property furnished as security for registration under the statutory bond and form could be proceeded against for recovery of the registered dealer&#039;s tax arrears. The bond expressly created a charge over the property in favour of the Government, and the description of the owner as a surety did not change the legal effect of the security. Because the property was bound by the terms of the security, the revenue authority had jurisdiction to enforce recovery against it even though the appellant was neither the registered dealer nor the tax defaulter. The challenge to attachment and recovery therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410904</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>