<?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>2019 (10) TMI 1498 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300959</link>
    <description>Interest under section 42(3) of the Tamil Nadu VAT Act was payable only on tax remaining unpaid after the period allowed for payment of an assessment demand. Where reassessed amounts arising from reversal of input tax credit had already been paid before the assessment orders, or were paid within 30 days of the orders, no interest could be charged. The assessment order itself functioned as the demand notice for assessed tax, and the dealer retained the statutory 30-day period to pay. The incorrectness of the input tax credit claim did not alter the timing rule for interest. Interest was therefore not leviable on the disputed reassessments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2022 07:56:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=672013" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (10) TMI 1498 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300959</link>
      <description>Interest under section 42(3) of the Tamil Nadu VAT Act was payable only on tax remaining unpaid after the period allowed for payment of an assessment demand. Where reassessed amounts arising from reversal of input tax credit had already been paid before the assessment orders, or were paid within 30 days of the orders, no interest could be charged. The assessment order itself functioned as the demand notice for assessed tax, and the dealer retained the statutory 30-day period to pay. The incorrectness of the input tax credit claim did not alter the timing rule for interest. Interest was therefore not leviable on the disputed reassessments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300959</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>