<?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>1994 (2) TMI 272 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157345</link>
    <description>Condonation of delay in revision proceedings is a procedural matter governed by the law in force when the revision is filed, not by the law existing when the original proceedings commenced. The court applied the principle that no vested right exists to seek condonation under an earlier limitation regime, and held the contrary view to be no longer good law. It also assessed the connected revision petitions category-wise under the amended limitation provision: delays beyond the statutory limit were not entertainable, while delays within the permissible period were condoned where satisfactorily explained, including correction of two petitions found to involve only an eight-day delay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Oct 2013 14:05:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174370" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (2) TMI 272 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157345</link>
      <description>Condonation of delay in revision proceedings is a procedural matter governed by the law in force when the revision is filed, not by the law existing when the original proceedings commenced. The court applied the principle that no vested right exists to seek condonation under an earlier limitation regime, and held the contrary view to be no longer good law. It also assessed the connected revision petitions category-wise under the amended limitation provision: delays beyond the statutory limit were not entertainable, while delays within the permissible period were condoned where satisfactorily explained, including correction of two petitions found to involve only an eight-day delay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157345</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>