<?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>1979 (4) TMI 139 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152329</link>
    <description>Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act was construed broadly to permit use of the State sales tax assessment machinery for Central Sales Tax assessments. A narrow reading of &quot;reference&quot; was rejected, and proceedings under section 35 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act were treated as substantively akin to a reference because they start with an assessee&#039;s application and require the Commissioner to express an opinion on the referred point. The process was viewed as declaratory of law rather than as affecting the validity of prior assessment orders. On that basis, the Commissioner was competent to entertain and decide the application on merits, and refusal solely because the issue concerned Central Sales Tax liability was incorrect.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Jun 2013 16:05:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169367" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (4) TMI 139 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152329</link>
      <description>Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act was construed broadly to permit use of the State sales tax assessment machinery for Central Sales Tax assessments. A narrow reading of &quot;reference&quot; was rejected, and proceedings under section 35 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act were treated as substantively akin to a reference because they start with an assessee&#039;s application and require the Commissioner to express an opinion on the referred point. The process was viewed as declaratory of law rather than as affecting the validity of prior assessment orders. On that basis, the Commissioner was competent to entertain and decide the application on merits, and refusal solely because the issue concerned Central Sales Tax liability was incorrect.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152329</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>