https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157534 Service of the first appellate order on the State representative was treated as service on the Commissioner for computing limitation under rule 68(9), so the Revenue's second appeal was within time and not barred by limitation. The Tribunal also upheld restoration of the best judgment assessment because the first appellate authority had reduced the enhancement without giving reasons, and the revised assessment was supported by factual appreciation. No legal error was shown warranting interference in revision, and the Tribunal's order was sustained in full. en-us Mon, 17 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Oct 2013 16:14:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157534 Service of the first appellate order on the State representative was treated as service on the Commissioner for computing limitation under rule 68(9), so the Revenue's second appeal was within time and not barred by limitation. The Tribunal also upheld restoration of the best judgment assessment because the first appellate authority had reduced the enhancement without giving reasons, and the revised assessment was supported by factual appreciation. No legal error was shown warranting interference in revision, and the Tribunal's order was sustained in full. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 17 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157534