<?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>2022 (4) TMI 1694 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470803</link>
    <description>Penalty under Section 54(1)(14) of the U.P. VAT Act requires an intention to evade tax. Omissions in columns 5 and 6 of Form 38 did not establish such intent where the goods were supported by relevant documents, their weight and description matched, and the transactions were recorded in the books and routed through banking channels. The unreversed finding of no intention to evade tax made restoration of the penalty unsustainable, and the penalty was therefore not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2026 18:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=916304" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 1694 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470803</link>
      <description>Penalty under Section 54(1)(14) of the U.P. VAT Act requires an intention to evade tax. Omissions in columns 5 and 6 of Form 38 did not establish such intent where the goods were supported by relevant documents, their weight and description matched, and the transactions were recorded in the books and routed through banking channels. The unreversed finding of no intention to evade tax made restoration of the penalty unsustainable, and the penalty was therefore not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470803</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>