<?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 (11) TMI 233 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152735</link>
    <description>Under the Central Sales Tax framework, declaration forms had to be produced in the prescribed manner, and the amended M.P. Sales Tax (Central) Rules empowered the Sales Tax Officer to issue a lesser number of forms than applied for if reasons were recorded in writing. Because the officer had not yet passed a final order on the application, the matter remained under statutory consideration and a writ court would not compel immediate supply of the forms by mandamus. The earlier condition imposed under rule 8(1-A)(f) could not be sustained after invalidation, but that did not justify bypassing the authority&#039;s pending decision-making process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:42:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169772" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (11) TMI 233 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152735</link>
      <description>Under the Central Sales Tax framework, declaration forms had to be produced in the prescribed manner, and the amended M.P. Sales Tax (Central) Rules empowered the Sales Tax Officer to issue a lesser number of forms than applied for if reasons were recorded in writing. Because the officer had not yet passed a final order on the application, the matter remained under statutory consideration and a writ court would not compel immediate supply of the forms by mandamus. The earlier condition imposed under rule 8(1-A)(f) could not be sustained after invalidation, but that did not justify bypassing the authority&#039;s pending decision-making process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152735</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>