<?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>1981 (9) TMI 253 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153208</link>
    <description>The reference jurisdiction under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act is narrower than appellate or revisional jurisdiction: a question of law arises out of a Tribunal order only if it was raised before the Tribunal or actually dealt with by it. A point merely included in the grounds of appeal or revision does not, by itself, establish that it was pressed before the Tribunal. If the Tribunal&#039;s order neither notices nor adjudicates the point, the normal presumption is that it was not raised, although that presumption may be rebutted by proof that it was urged and omitted from consideration. The contrary approach was disapproved and the earlier supporting decision overruled.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2013 14:33:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170244" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (9) TMI 253 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153208</link>
      <description>The reference jurisdiction under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act is narrower than appellate or revisional jurisdiction: a question of law arises out of a Tribunal order only if it was raised before the Tribunal or actually dealt with by it. A point merely included in the grounds of appeal or revision does not, by itself, establish that it was pressed before the Tribunal. If the Tribunal&#039;s order neither notices nor adjudicates the point, the normal presumption is that it was not raised, although that presumption may be rebutted by proof that it was urged and omitted from consideration. The contrary approach was disapproved and the earlier supporting decision overruled.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153208</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>