<?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 (5) TMI 235 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154461</link>
    <description>The doctrine of merger applies only to the extent a prior appellate or revisional order actually considered and decided the subject matter in issue. Under section 14 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, the dealer&#039;s and the assessing authority&#039;s revisional rights are distinct and independent, with different statutory limits. Because the earlier revision by the dealer could not validly adjudicate the departmental challenge to the setting aside of penalty under section 16(1)(b), the Deputy Commissioner&#039;s order did not merge in the Board&#039;s order on that point. The separate departmental revision was therefore maintainable and had to be decided on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2013 16:20:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171492" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (5) TMI 235 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154461</link>
      <description>The doctrine of merger applies only to the extent a prior appellate or revisional order actually considered and decided the subject matter in issue. Under section 14 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, the dealer&#039;s and the assessing authority&#039;s revisional rights are distinct and independent, with different statutory limits. Because the earlier revision by the dealer could not validly adjudicate the departmental challenge to the setting aside of penalty under section 16(1)(b), the Deputy Commissioner&#039;s order did not merge in the Board&#039;s order on that point. The separate departmental revision was therefore maintainable and had to be decided on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154461</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>