<?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 (7) TMI 523 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158866</link>
    <description>Revisional jurisdiction under section 10-B of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act is limited to testing the legality or propriety of the original assessment on the material then before the assessing authority. Where the alleged defect arises only from later-discovered information not forming part of the original record, the matter falls within escaped assessment or under-assessment under section 21, and reassessment is the proper statutory route. A revisional authority cannot use section 10-B to reopen an assessment on fresh material. The impugned notice was therefore held not sustainable and was quashed, with the connected proceedings set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2013 16:56:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335012" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (7) TMI 523 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158866</link>
      <description>Revisional jurisdiction under section 10-B of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act is limited to testing the legality or propriety of the original assessment on the material then before the assessing authority. Where the alleged defect arises only from later-discovered information not forming part of the original record, the matter falls within escaped assessment or under-assessment under section 21, and reassessment is the proper statutory route. A revisional authority cannot use section 10-B to reopen an assessment on fresh material. The impugned notice was therefore held not sustainable and was quashed, with the connected proceedings set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158866</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>