<?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>1976 (1) TMI 50 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65858</link>
    <description>Section 39(2) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 empowers the Commissioner to revise any order, including a penalty order, where it is erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, so the revisional power is not limited to assessment orders. However, a penalty order may be interfered with only if the assessing authority exercised discretion in a wrong or perverse manner. On the facts, the dealer had voluntarily deposited purchase tax before final assessment, sales tax had been regularly paid, and the conduct indicated bona fide ignorance of liability. The original lenient penalty order was therefore not shown to be erroneous, and revision enhancing the penalty was unjustified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jan 2016 11:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=104294" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (1) TMI 50 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65858</link>
      <description>Section 39(2) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 empowers the Commissioner to revise any order, including a penalty order, where it is erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, so the revisional power is not limited to assessment orders. However, a penalty order may be interfered with only if the assessing authority exercised discretion in a wrong or perverse manner. On the facts, the dealer had voluntarily deposited purchase tax before final assessment, sales tax had been regularly paid, and the conduct indicated bona fide ignorance of liability. The original lenient penalty order was therefore not shown to be erroneous, and revision enhancing the penalty was unjustified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65858</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>