<?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>1966 (2) TMI 61 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144067</link>
    <description>Rule 69 of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules, 1948 was treated as a procedural provision framed for the applicant&#039;s benefit rather than a rigid jurisdictional . Presentation of a revision petition through a peon of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, on the facts found, could amount to presentation by a duly authorised agent, and no written authority was required. Even if the mode of delivery was irregular, acceptance by the revising authority did not invalidate the revision proceedings because the rule was held directory and substantial compliance was sufficient.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 10:43:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166065" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1966 (2) TMI 61 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144067</link>
      <description>Rule 69 of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules, 1948 was treated as a procedural provision framed for the applicant&#039;s benefit rather than a rigid jurisdictional . Presentation of a revision petition through a peon of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, on the facts found, could amount to presentation by a duly authorised agent, and no written authority was required. Even if the mode of delivery was irregular, acceptance by the revising authority did not invalidate the revision proceedings because the rule was held directory and substantial compliance was sufficient.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144067</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>