https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150726 Section 78 of the States Reorganisation Act was applied to reject a jurisdictional challenge to sales tax recovery, because the dealer had not disputed jurisdiction in assessment proceedings and had not proved that his principal place of business was in Maharashtra on the relevant date. The Court also held that section 11(5) of the Central Provinces Sales Tax Act had to be read quarter-wise, since the statutory scheme treated each quarter as the unit of assessment. A composite reassessment covering both barred and unbarred quarters was therefore unsustainable, though fresh proceedings could be taken for quarters not time-barred. en-us Mon, 08 Apr 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 May 2013 18:16:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150726 Section 78 of the States Reorganisation Act was applied to reject a jurisdictional challenge to sales tax recovery, because the dealer had not disputed jurisdiction in assessment proceedings and had not proved that his principal place of business was in Maharashtra on the relevant date. The Court also held that section 11(5) of the Central Provinces Sales Tax Act had to be read quarter-wise, since the statutory scheme treated each quarter as the unit of assessment. A composite reassessment covering both barred and unbarred quarters was therefore unsustainable, though fresh proceedings could be taken for quarters not time-barred. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 08 Apr 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150726