<?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>2023 (9) TMI 1187 - JAMMU &amp; KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443565</link>
    <description>Penal interest could not be levied on licence fee deposited after the excise vend licence had not been renewed and the business remained closed. Under the applicable rules, the licence stood determined on expiry of the financial year if not renewed, so no subsisting licence existed and no licence fee was legally payable for those years. Because the amount was deposited pursuant to court order during the dispute, it was not a delayed discharge of an admitted liability. Penal interest under Section 24-A could arise only on non-payment of licence fee within the prescribed time, which was not established on the facts. The demand was therefore unsustainable and quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2023 21:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=727308" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 1187 - JAMMU &amp; KASHMIR AND LADAKH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443565</link>
      <description>Penal interest could not be levied on licence fee deposited after the excise vend licence had not been renewed and the business remained closed. Under the applicable rules, the licence stood determined on expiry of the financial year if not renewed, so no subsisting licence existed and no licence fee was legally payable for those years. Because the amount was deposited pursuant to court order during the dispute, it was not a delayed discharge of an admitted liability. Penal interest under Section 24-A could arise only on non-payment of licence fee within the prescribed time, which was not established on the facts. The demand was therefore unsustainable and quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443565</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>