https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127845 Finished garments made from mill cloth were treated as a different commercial commodity from textiles manufactured by mills, so the restricted single-point levy and labour-deduction claim did not apply. By contrast, turnover attributable to sales outside the State remained beyond the State's taxing power under Article 286(1), and the President's continuance order could not validate a levy barred by that provision. A rectification power under rule 35 was confined to mistakes apparent from the record and could not be used to reopen a best judgment assessment on fresh material or debatable issues. The article therefore explains a mixed tax position: classification and labour deduction failed, while outside-State taxation and revision were impermissible. en-us Wed, 18 Jun 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Mar 2013 11:34:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127845 Finished garments made from mill cloth were treated as a different commercial commodity from textiles manufactured by mills, so the restricted single-point levy and labour-deduction claim did not apply. By contrast, turnover attributable to sales outside the State remained beyond the State's taxing power under Article 286(1), and the President's continuance order could not validate a levy barred by that provision. A rectification power under rule 35 was confined to mistakes apparent from the record and could not be used to reopen a best judgment assessment on fresh material or debatable issues. The article therefore explains a mixed tax position: classification and labour deduction failed, while outside-State taxation and revision were impermissible. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 18 Jun 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127845