<?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>1995 (3) TMI 431 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157787</link>
    <description>A dealer whose registration has been cancelled may still obtain declaration forms for purchases made before the cancellation date. Rule 27AA(1) was read as permitting an application by a registered dealer for pre-cancellation purchases, while rule 27A(4) was confined to the return of unused forms no longer required for those purchases. The scheme was treated as intended to support concessional tax treatment for lawful purchases and to prevent misuse after cancellation. As the purchases related to periods when the dealer was treated as registered for assessment purposes, refusal solely because the registration had been cancelled was not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Oct 2013 16:26:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174810" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (3) TMI 431 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157787</link>
      <description>A dealer whose registration has been cancelled may still obtain declaration forms for purchases made before the cancellation date. Rule 27AA(1) was read as permitting an application by a registered dealer for pre-cancellation purchases, while rule 27A(4) was confined to the return of unused forms no longer required for those purchases. The scheme was treated as intended to support concessional tax treatment for lawful purchases and to prevent misuse after cancellation. As the purchases related to periods when the dealer was treated as registered for assessment purposes, refusal solely because the registration had been cancelled was not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157787</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>