<?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>2024 (4) TMI 720 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751539</link>
    <description>Section 43 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 places an embargo on transfers or charges made during pending proceedings, or after their completion, where the transfer is intended to defeat revenue. The proviso protects only purchases for adequate consideration made without notice of the pending proceedings or tax liability, or with prior permission of the assessing authority. On the stated facts, the Court found that assessment and demand had already culminated before attachment, but the purchaser failed to prove a clear bona fide purchase, especially given the parties&#039; prior acquaintance and shared business background. The challenge to attachment was therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2024 08:07:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=750440" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 720 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751539</link>
      <description>Section 43 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 places an embargo on transfers or charges made during pending proceedings, or after their completion, where the transfer is intended to defeat revenue. The proviso protects only purchases for adequate consideration made without notice of the pending proceedings or tax liability, or with prior permission of the assessing authority. On the stated facts, the Court found that assessment and demand had already culminated before attachment, but the purchaser failed to prove a clear bona fide purchase, especially given the parties&#039; prior acquaintance and shared business background. The challenge to attachment was therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751539</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>