https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127759 A dealer is not treated as having "failed to get himself registered" merely because registration was completed after an application was made and statutory enquiries took time. The Calcutta HC read section 11(2) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as operating where a dealer takes no steps to obtain registration, not where the delay is attributable to the authority after a bona fide application. It also held that a mistaken resort to section 11(2) did not by itself negate assessment power where tax liability had already arisen once turnover crossed the taxable quantum. Relief under Article 226 was not refused merely because a formal appeal was not pursued. en-us Fri, 17 May 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Mar 2013 10:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127759 A dealer is not treated as having "failed to get himself registered" merely because registration was completed after an application was made and statutory enquiries took time. The Calcutta HC read section 11(2) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as operating where a dealer takes no steps to obtain registration, not where the delay is attributable to the authority after a bona fide application. It also held that a mistaken resort to section 11(2) did not by itself negate assessment power where tax liability had already arisen once turnover crossed the taxable quantum. Relief under Article 226 was not refused merely because a formal appeal was not pursued. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 17 May 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127759