https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=146234 Refund suits for sales tax were treated as governed by a three-year period from the date of levy, not the limitation period in section 24 of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act, and time spent in bona fide writ proceedings could be excluded under section 14 of the Limitation Act; the refund claim was therefore within time. The exemption claim also failed because item 29 of Schedule I was confined to agricultural implements manufactured from raw iron and steel, while the assessee produced no reliable accounts to prove the exempt turnover. In the absence of supporting material, a best judgment assessment under section 12 was justified and was not shown to be arbitrary or without jurisdiction. en-us Mon, 07 Feb 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Apr 2013 17:22:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=146234 Refund suits for sales tax were treated as governed by a three-year period from the date of levy, not the limitation period in section 24 of the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act, and time spent in bona fide writ proceedings could be excluded under section 14 of the Limitation Act; the refund claim was therefore within time. The exemption claim also failed because item 29 of Schedule I was confined to agricultural implements manufactured from raw iron and steel, while the assessee produced no reliable accounts to prove the exempt turnover. In the absence of supporting material, a best judgment assessment under section 12 was justified and was not shown to be arbitrary or without jurisdiction. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 07 Feb 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=146234