<?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>1996 (11) TMI 429 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158743</link>
    <description>An order under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act that merely discharges a notice and records that no turnover escaped assessment does not replace the earlier assessment order, because it does not vary the assessed turnover or determine any fresh liability. On that basis, the original assessment remains the operative order for revision. The text also states that any revisional action against that assessment must be initiated within the prescribed four-year limitation period; where notice is issued after that period, the revision is time-barred and without jurisdiction. The revisional order was therefore set aside and the dealer&#039;s appeal allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2013 15:07:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=334673" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (11) TMI 429 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158743</link>
      <description>An order under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act that merely discharges a notice and records that no turnover escaped assessment does not replace the earlier assessment order, because it does not vary the assessed turnover or determine any fresh liability. On that basis, the original assessment remains the operative order for revision. The text also states that any revisional action against that assessment must be initiated within the prescribed four-year limitation period; where notice is issued after that period, the revision is time-barred and without jurisdiction. The revisional order was therefore set aside and the dealer&#039;s appeal allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158743</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>