<?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 (3) TMI 339 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157647</link>
    <description>The jurisdictional objection to collection of sales tax by obtaining cheques without prior assessment was rejected because a retrospective amendment to the Act validated the relevant delegation. Section 38(4) was treated as deeming the notifications to have always formed part of the Act and as protecting assessments, demands and connected action from invalidity. The petitioners&#039; admission of suppression of turnover and issuance of cheques after inspection also meant they could raise objections before the assessment authorities instead of seeking to prevent encashment by writ. The collection action was therefore not treated as without jurisdiction, and the requested relief was declined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Oct 2013 18:47:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174670" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (3) TMI 339 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157647</link>
      <description>The jurisdictional objection to collection of sales tax by obtaining cheques without prior assessment was rejected because a retrospective amendment to the Act validated the relevant delegation. Section 38(4) was treated as deeming the notifications to have always formed part of the Act and as protecting assessments, demands and connected action from invalidity. The petitioners&#039; admission of suppression of turnover and issuance of cheques after inspection also meant they could raise objections before the assessment authorities instead of seeking to prevent encashment by writ. The collection action was therefore not treated as without jurisdiction, and the requested relief was declined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157647</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>