https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160167 Under the Madhya Pradesh Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994, assessment jurisdiction could be exercised by an Assistant Commissioner when duly authorised within the statutory scheme of appointment and delegation. Reading sections 3 and 46 with Rule 91 of the 1995 Rules, the Court treated delegation of tax determination, assessment and penalty powers as valid and rejected the jurisdictional challenge. It also held that no mandamus could compel assessments to be taken up year-wise or in chronological order because no provision required that sequence, and the assessments were completed within the applicable limitation period. The writ petitions therefore failed and the assessment proceedings were permitted to continue. en-us Thu, 02 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Dec 2013 18:44:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160167 Under the Madhya Pradesh Vanijyik Kar Adhiniyam, 1994, assessment jurisdiction could be exercised by an Assistant Commissioner when duly authorised within the statutory scheme of appointment and delegation. Reading sections 3 and 46 with Rule 91 of the 1995 Rules, the Court treated delegation of tax determination, assessment and penalty powers as valid and rejected the jurisdictional challenge. It also held that no mandamus could compel assessments to be taken up year-wise or in chronological order because no provision required that sequence, and the assessments were completed within the applicable limitation period. The writ petitions therefore failed and the assessment proceedings were permitted to continue. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 02 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160167