<?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>1958 (8) TMI 39 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127812</link>
    <description>Retrospective validation of the 31 March 1956 sales tax notifications was upheld because the U.P. Sales Tax (Validation) Act, 1958 created a legal fiction treating them as issued under section 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, thereby curing the earlier defect. The challenge that section 3A conferred unconstitutional unfettered discretion on the State Government failed because the delegated power was controlled by legislative supervision under section 3A(3), including laying before the Assembly and possible amendment or modification by resolution. Writ relief was also refused, as the complaints were remediable through statutory appeal, revision or reference and no manifest error justified certiorari jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2013 14:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1958 (8) TMI 39 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127812</link>
      <description>Retrospective validation of the 31 March 1956 sales tax notifications was upheld because the U.P. Sales Tax (Validation) Act, 1958 created a legal fiction treating them as issued under section 3A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, thereby curing the earlier defect. The challenge that section 3A conferred unconstitutional unfettered discretion on the State Government failed because the delegated power was controlled by legislative supervision under section 3A(3), including laying before the Assembly and possible amendment or modification by resolution. Writ relief was also refused, as the complaints were remediable through statutory appeal, revision or reference and no manifest error justified certiorari jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 1958 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127812</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>