<?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>1968 (9) TMI 98 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA  HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148518</link>
    <description>Section 26 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 protects particulars contained in statements, returns, accounts, documents and records produced in accordance with the Act and used in assessment proceedings, and prevents compelled production of that protected material except as permitted by the section. A tenant&#039;s application for cancellation of a sales tax licence and the order passed on that application were outside that confidentiality regime because they were not assessment-related documents. The confidentiality provision was also treated as one that may be invoked by the officer called upon to produce protected material, not as a general privilege available to the assessee. The objection to summoning those documents therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:46:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166558" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (9) TMI 98 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA  HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148518</link>
      <description>Section 26 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 protects particulars contained in statements, returns, accounts, documents and records produced in accordance with the Act and used in assessment proceedings, and prevents compelled production of that protected material except as permitted by the section. A tenant&#039;s application for cancellation of a sales tax licence and the order passed on that application were outside that confidentiality regime because they were not assessment-related documents. The confidentiality provision was also treated as one that may be invoked by the officer called upon to produce protected material, not as a general privilege available to the assessee. The objection to summoning those documents therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148518</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>