<?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 (11) TMI 1132 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446241</link>
    <description>A prosecution for alleged service tax non-payment and short payment against a company officer was held not maintainable where the complaint concerned past acts and the later insolvency-related amendment had not yet come into force. The Court applied the settled principle that provisions enlarging penal liability operate prospectively unless the legislature clearly indicates otherwise. It also noted that the corporate debtor had gone into liquidation and its assets were sold as a going concern, but treated the timing of the amendment as decisive. The petitioner&#039;s request to quash the complaint was therefore accepted in relation to his alleged pre-amendment conduct.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2023 07:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=733255" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 1132 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446241</link>
      <description>A prosecution for alleged service tax non-payment and short payment against a company officer was held not maintainable where the complaint concerned past acts and the later insolvency-related amendment had not yet come into force. The Court applied the settled principle that provisions enlarging penal liability operate prospectively unless the legislature clearly indicates otherwise. It also noted that the corporate debtor had gone into liquidation and its assets were sold as a going concern, but treated the timing of the amendment as decisive. The petitioner&#039;s request to quash the complaint was therefore accepted in relation to his alleged pre-amendment conduct.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446241</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>