<?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>1993 (6) TMI 228 - KARNATAKA  HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157398</link>
    <description>An order dropping suo motu revision proceedings under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was held capable of revision under section 22-A, and the doctrine of merger applied where the later revisional process concerned the same subject-matter; the relevant order for limitation was therefore the order dropping the revision proceedings. On classification, the authorities had not made a clear factual finding on whether lead battery plates were meant for motor vehicle batteries under entry 73-B of the Second Schedule, so the issue could not be finally decided on the existing record. The classification dispute was remitted for a fresh factual determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Oct 2013 18:09:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174422" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (6) TMI 228 - KARNATAKA  HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157398</link>
      <description>An order dropping suo motu revision proceedings under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was held capable of revision under section 22-A, and the doctrine of merger applied where the later revisional process concerned the same subject-matter; the relevant order for limitation was therefore the order dropping the revision proceedings. On classification, the authorities had not made a clear factual finding on whether lead battery plates were meant for motor vehicle batteries under entry 73-B of the Second Schedule, so the issue could not be finally decided on the existing record. The classification dispute was remitted for a fresh factual determination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157398</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>