<?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>2022 (3) TMI 799 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419761</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the Sales Tax Revision Petition, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. The Tribunal&#039;s decision to set aside the interest and penalty imposed under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act was upheld, as there was no evidence of understatement of tax liability or overstatement of input tax credit by the respondent in the case involving the sale of Nutralite.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Mar 2022 13:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=673337" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 799 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419761</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the Sales Tax Revision Petition, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. The Tribunal&#039;s decision to set aside the interest and penalty imposed under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act was upheld, as there was no evidence of understatement of tax liability or overstatement of input tax credit by the respondent in the case involving the sale of Nutralite.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419761</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>