<?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>1975 (8) TMI 112 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151117</link>
    <description>Rule 85(4) made issuance of blank declaration forms dependent on the Sales Tax Officer&#039;s satisfaction that the dealer&#039;s demand was genuine and reasonable, and on proper accounting for earlier forms before any further supply. The High Court declined to use writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to compel issuance of the requested forms, holding that it would not substitute its view for the officer&#039;s assessment. The petitioner was required to pursue the statutory appellate remedy to contest the sanctioned quantity and explain prior forms. The attempt to challenge sub-rule (4) itself was not entertained because it had not been pleaded in the writ petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 15:47:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168156" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (8) TMI 112 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151117</link>
      <description>Rule 85(4) made issuance of blank declaration forms dependent on the Sales Tax Officer&#039;s satisfaction that the dealer&#039;s demand was genuine and reasonable, and on proper accounting for earlier forms before any further supply. The High Court declined to use writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to compel issuance of the requested forms, holding that it would not substitute its view for the officer&#039;s assessment. The petitioner was required to pursue the statutory appellate remedy to contest the sanctioned quantity and explain prior forms. The attempt to challenge sub-rule (4) itself was not entertained because it had not been pleaded in the writ petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151117</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>