<?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>1967 (4) TMI 167 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100478</link>
    <description>A nil assessment order that neither computed turnover nor determined tax was not an appealable order, because it created no grievance for the assessee and no objection could be raised against it. Non-service of the order did not invalidate it, and the absence of communication did not bar revisional action under section 32 of Act 1 of 1959. The Deputy Commissioner&#039;s revisional jurisdiction therefore remained available, and the order could validly be reviewed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Sep 2013 13:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137529" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (4) TMI 167 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100478</link>
      <description>A nil assessment order that neither computed turnover nor determined tax was not an appealable order, because it created no grievance for the assessee and no objection could be raised against it. Non-service of the order did not invalidate it, and the absence of communication did not bar revisional action under section 32 of Act 1 of 1959. The Deputy Commissioner&#039;s revisional jurisdiction therefore remained available, and the order could validly be reviewed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Apr 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100478</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>