<?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>1987 (2) TMI 496 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155416</link>
    <description>Reassessment under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 is valid only where fresh material shows escaped turnover, under-assessment, a lower rate, or wrongly allowed exemption or deduction. The assessing authority cannot reopen a concluded assessment merely to revise the earlier reasoning or strengthen the original order after becoming functus officio. As no new material showed that the brick-kiln operated longer or that coal purchases justified a higher turnover for the same period, the reassessment rested on matters that should have been examined in the original assessment. The reassessment proceedings were therefore invalid and were quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2013 12:26:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172447" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (2) TMI 496 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155416</link>
      <description>Reassessment under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 is valid only where fresh material shows escaped turnover, under-assessment, a lower rate, or wrongly allowed exemption or deduction. The assessing authority cannot reopen a concluded assessment merely to revise the earlier reasoning or strengthen the original order after becoming functus officio. As no new material showed that the brick-kiln operated longer or that coal purchases justified a higher turnover for the same period, the reassessment rested on matters that should have been examined in the original assessment. The reassessment proceedings were therefore invalid and were quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155416</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>