https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157778 Retrospective substitution of the charging and recovery provisions under the Rajasthan Sales Tax framework was treated as curing the earlier unenforceability of tax on turnover of goods involved in works contracts. The amended section 5(3), effective from 1 April 1987, together with the substituted rule 29(2)(i), supplied the statutory basis that had previously been found lacking, so the revenue authorities could proceed to recover tax in accordance with the amended law. On that basis, the challenge to recovery failed and the order of the Single Judge was set aside. en-us Thu, 15 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Oct 2013 15:44:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157778 Retrospective substitution of the charging and recovery provisions under the Rajasthan Sales Tax framework was treated as curing the earlier unenforceability of tax on turnover of goods involved in works contracts. The amended section 5(3), effective from 1 April 1987, together with the substituted rule 29(2)(i), supplied the statutory basis that had previously been found lacking, so the revenue authorities could proceed to recover tax in accordance with the amended law. On that basis, the challenge to recovery failed and the order of the Single Judge was set aside. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 15 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157778