<?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 (12) TMI 1295 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763715</link>
    <description>A penalty order under the APVAT Act, 2005 could not be sustained because it was passed without issuing a show cause notice, and that defect was accepted. The High Court had quashed the penalty on that basis, and the Supreme Court found no ground to interfere. It also noted that, if otherwise permissible in law, the revenue could still initiate fresh proceedings by issuing a proper show cause notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Dec 2024 09:00:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=784692" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 1295 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763715</link>
      <description>A penalty order under the APVAT Act, 2005 could not be sustained because it was passed without issuing a show cause notice, and that defect was accepted. The High Court had quashed the penalty on that basis, and the Supreme Court found no ground to interfere. It also noted that, if otherwise permissible in law, the revenue could still initiate fresh proceedings by issuing a proper show cause notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763715</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>