<?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>1970 (1) TMI 69 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=149809</link>
    <description>The statutory scheme treated a Sales Tax Officer appointed to a circle as the assessing authority for that circle, with territorial jurisdiction fixed by the circle system and the power of assessment expressly conferred by the rules. The provision allowing the State Government to authorise assessment through rules was read together with the rules assigning those powers, including the rule by which superior officers exercised the powers of a Sales Tax Officer. On that construction, no separate authorisation order was required, and the later rule stating the same position was merely declaratory of an existing legal position. Earlier observations suggesting a gap in the scheme were treated as non-decisive, and the challenge to the validity of the assessments failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 18:10:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=166850" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (1) TMI 69 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=149809</link>
      <description>The statutory scheme treated a Sales Tax Officer appointed to a circle as the assessing authority for that circle, with territorial jurisdiction fixed by the circle system and the power of assessment expressly conferred by the rules. The provision allowing the State Government to authorise assessment through rules was read together with the rules assigning those powers, including the rule by which superior officers exercised the powers of a Sales Tax Officer. On that construction, no separate authorisation order was required, and the later rule stating the same position was merely declaratory of an existing legal position. Earlier observations suggesting a gap in the scheme were treated as non-decisive, and the challenge to the validity of the assessments failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=149809</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>