https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155167 Under the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, section 38(3) was construed as governing the stage when an appeal is considered for admission, not the mere filing of the memorandum. Non-filing of challans with the appeal did not justify automatic summary rejection, because rule 58(1) requires the authority to permit cure of defects under rule 57. Rule 58(3) only applies where proof of prior payment is later produced and does not mandate dismissal solely because payment was not made with the appeal. As the tax had been paid and proof was produced before final consideration for admission, refusal to admit the appeal was unjustified. en-us Thu, 05 Dec 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Aug 2013 18:22:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155167 Under the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, section 38(3) was construed as governing the stage when an appeal is considered for admission, not the mere filing of the memorandum. Non-filing of challans with the appeal did not justify automatic summary rejection, because rule 58(1) requires the authority to permit cure of defects under rule 57. Rule 58(3) only applies where proof of prior payment is later produced and does not mandate dismissal solely because payment was not made with the appeal. As the tax had been paid and proof was produced before final consideration for admission, refusal to admit the appeal was unjustified. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 05 Dec 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155167