<?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>2025 (9) TMI 987 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778498</link>
    <description>HC held the vehicle was a truck with open body per its registration certificate, not a light commercial vehicle, and the State did not contradict this. The Appellate Authority&#039;s characterization of the vehicle as light lacked supporting material and no clarification was sought. Authorities recorded no finding of intent to evade tax. Consequently, orders passed under the relevant provision of the tax law and the appellate order were quashed and the petition was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2025 13:30:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=851117" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 987 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778498</link>
      <description>HC held the vehicle was a truck with open body per its registration certificate, not a light commercial vehicle, and the State did not contradict this. The Appellate Authority&#039;s characterization of the vehicle as light lacked supporting material and no clarification was sought. Authorities recorded no finding of intent to evade tax. Consequently, orders passed under the relevant provision of the tax law and the appellate order were quashed and the petition was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778498</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>