<?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>1965 (10) TMI 60 - MYSORE HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144133</link>
    <description>Unassessed turnover was held to be assessable within the statutory scheme where notice in Form 13 was issued within the prescribed limitation period, so the assessments were not time-barred. Omission to issue notice under section 15 did not invalidate the assessments because section 14(5) separately authorised best judgment assessment where returns were not furnished by the prescribed date, after reasonable opportunity of hearing. The Court held that failure to file returns could fall within both provisions, since section 15 governed escaped turnover and section 14(5) covered non-filing, and the two provisions overlapped rather than excluded each other. The assessments were therefore valid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Apr 2013 10:25:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166131" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (10) TMI 60 - MYSORE HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144133</link>
      <description>Unassessed turnover was held to be assessable within the statutory scheme where notice in Form 13 was issued within the prescribed limitation period, so the assessments were not time-barred. Omission to issue notice under section 15 did not invalidate the assessments because section 14(5) separately authorised best judgment assessment where returns were not furnished by the prescribed date, after reasonable opportunity of hearing. The Court held that failure to file returns could fall within both provisions, since section 15 governed escaped turnover and section 14(5) covered non-filing, and the two provisions overlapped rather than excluded each other. The assessments were therefore valid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=144133</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>