<?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>1964 (11) TMI 82 - PUNJAB HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=129028</link>
    <description>The Punjab General Sales Tax Act and Rules ordinarily required assessment by the appropriate local Assessing Authority having territorial connection with the dealer&#039;s place of business. Although the Act did not expressly provide for transfer of pending assessment cases, the Court recognised an implied supervisory power in the Commissioner under rule 69 to transfer proceedings where more than one lawful Assessing Authority existed. That power had to be exercised on relevant considerations, including tax administration needs and the dealer&#039;s reasonable convenience, and not by arbitrary or concurrent assumption of jurisdiction. Notices issued by the Chandigarh authority were quashed because no proper transfer order had been made, while the authority&#039;s power to pass a lawful transfer order and proceed afresh was preserved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 15:49:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165897" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (11) TMI 82 - PUNJAB HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=129028</link>
      <description>The Punjab General Sales Tax Act and Rules ordinarily required assessment by the appropriate local Assessing Authority having territorial connection with the dealer&#039;s place of business. Although the Act did not expressly provide for transfer of pending assessment cases, the Court recognised an implied supervisory power in the Commissioner under rule 69 to transfer proceedings where more than one lawful Assessing Authority existed. That power had to be exercised on relevant considerations, including tax administration needs and the dealer&#039;s reasonable convenience, and not by arbitrary or concurrent assumption of jurisdiction. Notices issued by the Chandigarh authority were quashed because no proper transfer order had been made, while the authority&#039;s power to pass a lawful transfer order and proceed afresh was preserved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=129028</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>