<?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 (7) TMI 121 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148362</link>
    <description>An escaped-assessment order could not be made under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for an assessment completed under the repealed 1939 Act, because the rights and liabilities arising from that assessment were governed by the law in force when the return was filed. The saving clause preserved accrued rights, obligations and liabilities under the repealed Act, and the earlier escaped-turnover procedure remained controlled by rule 17 rather than the new Act&#039;s assessment machinery. Section 16(1) could not be used to enlarge the assessing authority&#039;s jurisdiction, and the later retrospective amendment likewise did not confer that jurisdiction. The order was therefore without jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jul 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:31:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166402" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (7) TMI 121 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148362</link>
      <description>An escaped-assessment order could not be made under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959 for an assessment completed under the repealed 1939 Act, because the rights and liabilities arising from that assessment were governed by the law in force when the return was filed. The saving clause preserved accrued rights, obligations and liabilities under the repealed Act, and the earlier escaped-turnover procedure remained controlled by rule 17 rather than the new Act&#039;s assessment machinery. Section 16(1) could not be used to enlarge the assessing authority&#039;s jurisdiction, and the later retrospective amendment likewise did not confer that jurisdiction. The order was therefore without jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jul 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148362</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>