<?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>1999 (2) TMI 522 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104600</link>
    <description>Section 32(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act allows revision when the appeal period has expired, no appeal or revision is pending, and four years from the assessment order have not lapsed; a timely revision is not defeated because it is decided later, and the absence of an appeal by the assessee does not bar revision. On merits, the Tribunal&#039;s factual finding that the transaction fell within section 5(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act could not be reopened in revision, because section 38 confines interference to an erroneous or omitted question of law. The revisional challenge therefore failed and the Tribunal&#039;s order stood.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2013 12:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141639" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (2) TMI 522 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104600</link>
      <description>Section 32(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act allows revision when the appeal period has expired, no appeal or revision is pending, and four years from the assessment order have not lapsed; a timely revision is not defeated because it is decided later, and the absence of an appeal by the assessee does not bar revision. On merits, the Tribunal&#039;s factual finding that the transaction fell within section 5(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act could not be reopened in revision, because section 38 confines interference to an erroneous or omitted question of law. The revisional challenge therefore failed and the Tribunal&#039;s order stood.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104600</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>