<?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>1959 (9) TMI 35 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127894</link>
    <description>The proviso to section 24(1) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947 was a condition precedent to entertaining an appeal, so an appellate authority could decline it at the threshold for non-compliance. However, once the appeal had been admitted and argued on the assessee&#039;s denial of liability, the defect in the memorandum could not be used to dismiss the appeal in limine; that dismissal was not lawful. The assessment was treated as a single and indivisible order, and after appellate adjudication had reached finality, the Deputy Commissioner could not reopen or revise the same assessment. The revisional challenge to the refusal to entertain the appeal therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:32:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164768" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1959 (9) TMI 35 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127894</link>
      <description>The proviso to section 24(1) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947 was a condition precedent to entertaining an appeal, so an appellate authority could decline it at the threshold for non-compliance. However, once the appeal had been admitted and argued on the assessee&#039;s denial of liability, the defect in the memorandum could not be used to dismiss the appeal in limine; that dismissal was not lawful. The assessment was treated as a single and indivisible order, and after appellate adjudication had reached finality, the Deputy Commissioner could not reopen or revise the same assessment. The revisional challenge to the refusal to entertain the appeal therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 1959 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127894</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>