<?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>1967 (8) TMI 112 - MYSORE HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148322</link>
    <description>Statutory review by a sales tax tribunal cannot be invoked merely because an existing judicial precedent was not cited earlier, since that omission is not a new fact but a legal contention. The review power under section 22(6)(a) was confined to factual material not before the Tribunal when the original order was made, so the Tribunal could not reopen its order on that basis. Rectification under rule 38 was also unavailable because the Tribunal had not exercised that distinct power. Reliance on Articles 226 and 227 could not sustain the order in revision. The review order was therefore without authority, the earlier order was restored, and the matter was remitted for fresh factual investigation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:00:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166362" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (8) TMI 112 - MYSORE HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148322</link>
      <description>Statutory review by a sales tax tribunal cannot be invoked merely because an existing judicial precedent was not cited earlier, since that omission is not a new fact but a legal contention. The review power under section 22(6)(a) was confined to factual material not before the Tribunal when the original order was made, so the Tribunal could not reopen its order on that basis. Rectification under rule 38 was also unavailable because the Tribunal had not exercised that distinct power. Reliance on Articles 226 and 227 could not sustain the order in revision. The review order was therefore without authority, the earlier order was restored, and the matter was remitted for fresh factual investigation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148322</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>