<?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>1983 (7) TMI 283 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154032</link>
    <description>A revision under section 21(2) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act is not barred merely because the assessee filed an appeal under section 20 that was dismissed as time-barred. The expression &quot;appeal preferred under section 20&quot; was read to mean a valid appeal filed in conformity with the statutory requirements, including limitation. A time-barred appeal dismissed without examination on merits does not validly invoke appellate jurisdiction and therefore does not exclude revisional power. The revisional authority remained competent to examine the legality or propriety of the assessment order, and the challenge to the Tribunal&#039;s view failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Aug 2013 16:24:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171066" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (7) TMI 283 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154032</link>
      <description>A revision under section 21(2) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act is not barred merely because the assessee filed an appeal under section 20 that was dismissed as time-barred. The expression &quot;appeal preferred under section 20&quot; was read to mean a valid appeal filed in conformity with the statutory requirements, including limitation. A time-barred appeal dismissed without examination on merits does not validly invoke appellate jurisdiction and therefore does not exclude revisional power. The revisional authority remained competent to examine the legality or propriety of the assessment order, and the challenge to the Tribunal&#039;s view failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154032</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>