<?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>1998 (8) TMI 583 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160160</link>
    <description>A pending or even successful challenge to seizure did not, by itself, invalidate assessment proceedings or exclude the seized material from consideration. The assessing authority was entitled to require the dealer to produce books and appear where the records were kept, as this formed a reasonable opportunity of hearing and was within jurisdiction. The limitation objection also failed because the earlier interim order did not fall within the proviso to section 8(7) and had been continued until disposal of the main application, so it did not automatically lapse after six months. The notices were upheld and the challenge failed in full.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2013 18:02:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=338863" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 583 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160160</link>
      <description>A pending or even successful challenge to seizure did not, by itself, invalidate assessment proceedings or exclude the seized material from consideration. The assessing authority was entitled to require the dealer to produce books and appear where the records were kept, as this formed a reasonable opportunity of hearing and was within jurisdiction. The limitation objection also failed because the earlier interim order did not fall within the proviso to section 8(7) and had been continued until disposal of the main application, so it did not automatically lapse after six months. The notices were upheld and the challenge failed in full.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160160</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>