<?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>1992 (2) TMI 336 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156654</link>
    <description>Revisional power exercised on the ground that an assessment was illegal or improper is governed by the shorter four-year limitation under section 14(4-A) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 unless there is a finding that the dealer failed to disclose turnover or particulars correctly; here no such finding was recorded, so the revisional order was time-barred and unsustainable under section 14(4). The revision also could not be upheld under section 20(2) because no fresh material was shown before the revisional authority and the true nature of the exercise remained unchanged. The Tribunal&#039;s order was affirmed and the revision petition failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2013 14:07:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173680" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (2) TMI 336 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156654</link>
      <description>Revisional power exercised on the ground that an assessment was illegal or improper is governed by the shorter four-year limitation under section 14(4-A) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 unless there is a finding that the dealer failed to disclose turnover or particulars correctly; here no such finding was recorded, so the revisional order was time-barred and unsustainable under section 14(4). The revision also could not be upheld under section 20(2) because no fresh material was shown before the revisional authority and the true nature of the exercise remained unchanged. The Tribunal&#039;s order was affirmed and the revision petition failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156654</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>