<?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 (9) TMI 144 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101376</link>
    <description>A return filed by a registered dealer commences pending sales tax assessment proceedings, and a notice under section 11(2) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, may be issued without any prescribed limitation period. The Court held that the limitation applicable to best judgment or escaped assessment provisions could not be imported into assessments under section 11(1) to section 11(3), and a merely reasonable-time requirement could not invalidate the notice. The earlier Full Bench view treating section 11(3) as subject to the best judgment limitation was overruled as inconsistent with binding precedent. The assessment proceedings were therefore not time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138426" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (9) TMI 144 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101376</link>
      <description>A return filed by a registered dealer commences pending sales tax assessment proceedings, and a notice under section 11(2) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, may be issued without any prescribed limitation period. The Court held that the limitation applicable to best judgment or escaped assessment provisions could not be imported into assessments under section 11(1) to section 11(3), and a merely reasonable-time requirement could not invalidate the notice. The earlier Full Bench view treating section 11(3) as subject to the best judgment limitation was overruled as inconsistent with binding precedent. The assessment proceedings were therefore not time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101376</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>