https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128068 Cocoanuts exported outside the State for consumption fell within the protection of Article 286(1)(a), because the pleadings so asserted, the allegation was not denied, and no contrary evidence was produced. The suits for refund were within limitation, as the right to claim arose only on final assessment under the assessment rules, not on the monthly returns, and they were filed within three years of that assessment. Section 18-A of the Madras General Sales Tax Act did not bar the suits, since they did not seek to set aside the assessment but challenged tax collection contrary to the constitutional restriction, and civil courts were competent to entertain them. en-us Thu, 12 Nov 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:31:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128068 Cocoanuts exported outside the State for consumption fell within the protection of Article 286(1)(a), because the pleadings so asserted, the allegation was not denied, and no contrary evidence was produced. The suits for refund were within limitation, as the right to claim arose only on final assessment under the assessment rules, not on the monthly returns, and they were filed within three years of that assessment. Section 18-A of the Madras General Sales Tax Act did not bar the suits, since they did not seek to set aside the assessment but challenged tax collection contrary to the constitutional restriction, and civil courts were competent to entertain them. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 12 Nov 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128068