<?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>1984 (7) TMI 341 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154334</link>
    <description>Disclosed turnover not considered on merits by the assessing authority is treated as escaped assessment, and must be dealt with under the escaped-turnover provisions rather than by revisional jurisdiction. The Karnataka HC applied the distinction between escaped turnover and erroneous assessment and held that the Deputy Commissioner could not invoke section 21(2) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act to revise turnover the assessing authority had omitted to tax without applying its mind to it. As the disputed turnover fell within the escaped-assessment field, revision was without jurisdiction and the assessee&#039;s challenge succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Aug 2013 14:42:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171367" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (7) TMI 341 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154334</link>
      <description>Disclosed turnover not considered on merits by the assessing authority is treated as escaped assessment, and must be dealt with under the escaped-turnover provisions rather than by revisional jurisdiction. The Karnataka HC applied the distinction between escaped turnover and erroneous assessment and held that the Deputy Commissioner could not invoke section 21(2) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act to revise turnover the assessing authority had omitted to tax without applying its mind to it. As the disputed turnover fell within the escaped-assessment field, revision was without jurisdiction and the assessee&#039;s challenge succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154334</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>