<?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 (10) TMI 60 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA  HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150025</link>
    <description>Applications seeking a reference under section 22(1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 were treated as within limitation where the period spent obtaining certified copies of the Financial Commissioner&#039;s order was excluded and the last day fell on a holiday. The text notes a Tribunal view that section 12(2) of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 did not apply, but also records that any delay could be condoned under section 5. On the facts, limitation was reckoned from the date the petitioner obtained the copy, particularly because only intimation of dismissal had been given and the copy was not supplied earlier. The applications were therefore not time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 09:51:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=167066" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (10) TMI 60 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA  HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150025</link>
      <description>Applications seeking a reference under section 22(1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 were treated as within limitation where the period spent obtaining certified copies of the Financial Commissioner&#039;s order was excluded and the last day fell on a holiday. The text notes a Tribunal view that section 12(2) of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 did not apply, but also records that any delay could be condoned under section 5. On the facts, limitation was reckoned from the date the petitioner obtained the copy, particularly because only intimation of dismissal had been given and the copy was not supplied earlier. The applications were therefore not time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150025</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>