<?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>1980 (11) TMI 138 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152962</link>
    <description>The unamended reopening provision under section 19(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 allowed reassessment only on the basis of information already in the assessing authority&#039;s possession. An amendment by Act No. 20 of 1961 enlarged that power and was substantive, because it affected the assessee&#039;s existing protection against reopening of a completed assessment. As no retrospective operation was expressed or necessarily implied, the amended provision could not apply to the completed assessment for 1959-60. Reopening on the ground that earlier accepted C forms were defective was therefore unlawful.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jul 2013 11:38:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169999" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (11) TMI 138 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152962</link>
      <description>The unamended reopening provision under section 19(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 allowed reassessment only on the basis of information already in the assessing authority&#039;s possession. An amendment by Act No. 20 of 1961 enlarged that power and was substantive, because it affected the assessee&#039;s existing protection against reopening of a completed assessment. As no retrospective operation was expressed or necessarily implied, the amended provision could not apply to the completed assessment for 1959-60. Reopening on the ground that earlier accepted C forms were defective was therefore unlawful.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152962</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>