<?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>2011 (9) TMI 585 - Delhi High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210740</link>
    <description>The repeal of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 did not extinguish the Commissioner&#039;s revisional power where liability and the revisional period had not been barred by limitation. Section 106(2) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 preserved accrued rights, obligations and liabilities under the repealed Act, while Section 106(3) deemed acts done under the old law to be done under the new law. The retrospective insertion of Section 74A from 1 April 2005 was treated as clarificatory and curative, keeping suo motu revision alive for eligible DST assessments. Earlier Division Bench views to the contrary were overruled to that extent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2014 17:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=184173" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (9) TMI 585 - Delhi High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210740</link>
      <description>The repeal of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 did not extinguish the Commissioner&#039;s revisional power where liability and the revisional period had not been barred by limitation. Section 106(2) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 preserved accrued rights, obligations and liabilities under the repealed Act, while Section 106(3) deemed acts done under the old law to be done under the new law. The retrospective insertion of Section 74A from 1 April 2005 was treated as clarificatory and curative, keeping suo motu revision alive for eligible DST assessments. Earlier Division Bench views to the contrary were overruled to that extent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210740</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>