https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127388 Wide rule-making power under the Madras General Sales Tax Act authorised rule 14(2), because the Act permitted rules prescribing officers' duties, powers, and other measures necessary to give effect to the statute; the revisional provision was therefore valid. However, revision under rule 14(2) and reassessment under rule 17 operated in distinct fields. Rule 17 was confined to escaped turnover, while rule 14(2) applied to illegal or improper assessment orders where the turnover had already been considered. The two procedures were mutually exclusive, so revision could not be used where escaped-turnover reassessment was the proper route. en-us Thu, 21 Apr 1955 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Mar 2013 12:36:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127388 Wide rule-making power under the Madras General Sales Tax Act authorised rule 14(2), because the Act permitted rules prescribing officers' duties, powers, and other measures necessary to give effect to the statute; the revisional provision was therefore valid. However, revision under rule 14(2) and reassessment under rule 17 operated in distinct fields. Rule 17 was confined to escaped turnover, while rule 14(2) applied to illegal or improper assessment orders where the turnover had already been considered. The two procedures were mutually exclusive, so revision could not be used where escaped-turnover reassessment was the proper route. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 21 Apr 1955 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127388