<?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>1986 (11) TMI 364 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154840</link>
    <description>Service of an assessment order by registered post on the daughter of a co-operative society&#039;s secretary was not valid service under Rule 77(4) of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules. The court held that the phrase &quot;member of his family&quot; is independent, but it applies to persons who can have a family in the natural-person sense; a juristic entity such as a co-operative society has no family for this purpose. Service on a family member of an officer was therefore not service on the society itself. The service was invalid, the finding that the appeal was time-barred could not stand, and the revision succeeded with a direction to hear the appeal on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 16:54:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171871" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (11) TMI 364 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154840</link>
      <description>Service of an assessment order by registered post on the daughter of a co-operative society&#039;s secretary was not valid service under Rule 77(4) of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules. The court held that the phrase &quot;member of his family&quot; is independent, but it applies to persons who can have a family in the natural-person sense; a juristic entity such as a co-operative society has no family for this purpose. Service on a family member of an officer was therefore not service on the society itself. The service was invalid, the finding that the appeal was time-barred could not stand, and the revision succeeded with a direction to hear the appeal on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154840</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>