<?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>1991 (1) TMI 397 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156271</link>
    <description>Documentary evidence not produced before the assessing authority cannot ordinarily be entertained at the revisional stage without a satisfactory explanation for the earlier default, and the refusal to accept such declaration forms was not shown to be perverse. Repeated adjournments had already been granted, and where the request for further time was only verbal, made as the assessment approached limitation, and no specific further prayer to produce books or declarations was made, refusal of adjournment did not amount to denial of a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The reference was therefore answered against the assessee on both substantive questions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2013 14:25:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173298" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (1) TMI 397 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156271</link>
      <description>Documentary evidence not produced before the assessing authority cannot ordinarily be entertained at the revisional stage without a satisfactory explanation for the earlier default, and the refusal to accept such declaration forms was not shown to be perverse. Repeated adjournments had already been granted, and where the request for further time was only verbal, made as the assessment approached limitation, and no specific further prayer to produce books or declarations was made, refusal of adjournment did not amount to denial of a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The reference was therefore answered against the assessee on both substantive questions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156271</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>