<?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 153 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101124</link>
    <description>The revisional power under section 20(3) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 is independent of the limitation governing assessment under section 11(2a) and is not restricted by section 11-A on escaped or under-assessment. The use of the term &quot;Commissioner&quot; across the provisions does not import the assessment limitation into revisional jurisdiction, because the powers operate in different statutory fields. Suo motu revision is nevertheless required to be exercised within a reasonable time, to be judged on the facts; on the facts stated, the revision was made within a few months and was not delayed unduly. The statutory scheme therefore permitted the revisional interference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138174" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (1) TMI 153 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101124</link>
      <description>The revisional power under section 20(3) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 is independent of the limitation governing assessment under section 11(2a) and is not restricted by section 11-A on escaped or under-assessment. The use of the term &quot;Commissioner&quot; across the provisions does not import the assessment limitation into revisional jurisdiction, because the powers operate in different statutory fields. Suo motu revision is nevertheless required to be exercised within a reasonable time, to be judged on the facts; on the facts stated, the revision was made within a few months and was not delayed unduly. The statutory scheme therefore permitted the revisional interference.</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=101124</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>