TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a notification issued under the earlier sales tax regime could be treated as saved and continued under the repeal and saving provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008, so as to sustain the Commissioner's circular requiring cash security on import of coal.
Analysis: Section 19(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 permits cash security only in respect of goods notified by the Government. Section 81(1) repeals the earlier trade tax law, while Section 81(2)(a) expressly saves notifications and other actions taken under the repealed enactment and deems them to have been issued under the corresponding provisions of the new Act, so far as they are not inconsistent with it. The Court treated this saving provision as creating a legal fiction preserving operative notifications. It held that the notification dated 31.3.1986, though issued under the earlier sales tax nomenclature, was covered by the saving clause because the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act had been amended and renamed, and the reference to the Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act in Section 81 was sufficient to include notifications issued under the former nomenclature. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 was held to yield to the specific legislative intention expressed in Section 81.
Conclusion: The circular was held to be within jurisdiction, and the challenge to it failed.
TaxTMI 
