<?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 244 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152804</link>
    <description>Section 14(6) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 validly permits assessment of an unregistered dealer without importing the limitation period applicable to reassessment of registered dealers under section 15(1). The court treated registered and unregistered dealers as distinct classes, noting that the absence of a limitation period for unregistered dealers has a rational nexus with the object of preventing tax evasion. A prior Supreme Court decision on a different statutory setting, where both provisions applied to the same class of registered dealers, did not control the issue. The Tribunal was therefore wrong to apply the reassessment limitation and to fix liability from 1 April 1958 instead of 1 April 1957.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2013 14:20:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169841" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (11) TMI 244 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152804</link>
      <description>Section 14(6) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 validly permits assessment of an unregistered dealer without importing the limitation period applicable to reassessment of registered dealers under section 15(1). The court treated registered and unregistered dealers as distinct classes, noting that the absence of a limitation period for unregistered dealers has a rational nexus with the object of preventing tax evasion. A prior Supreme Court decision on a different statutory setting, where both provisions applied to the same class of registered dealers, did not control the issue. The Tribunal was therefore wrong to apply the reassessment limitation and to fix liability from 1 April 1958 instead of 1 April 1957.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152804</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>