<?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 113 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151129</link>
    <description>In revision proceedings under section 39(2) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, the relevant date for limitation is the date on which the Commissioner issues the notice. The view that limitation should run until service of notice on the assessee was not accepted, because earlier authority had already treated timely issue of notice as sufficient to commence revision within time.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 16:44:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168168" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (8) TMI 113 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151129</link>
      <description>In revision proceedings under section 39(2) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, the relevant date for limitation is the date on which the Commissioner issues the notice. The view that limitation should run until service of notice on the assessee was not accepted, because earlier authority had already treated timely issue of notice as sufficient to commence revision within time.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151129</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>