<?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>2002 (5) TMI 827 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161348</link>
    <description>Reopening of inter-State sales tax assessments was treated as valid where the notices and reopening order followed the prescribed machinery under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 and the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941, as applied through the Central Sales Tax rules, even though the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 was not expressly named. The omission was treated as one of form, not substance, because no prejudice was shown and the assessee knew both intra-State and inter-State turnovers were under scrutiny. The reopening order was also treated as duly authorised, and the assessee&#039;s participation without protest supported waiver and estoppel by conduct. The reopening and consequential assessment proceedings were therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2014 12:06:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342802" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (5) TMI 827 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161348</link>
      <description>Reopening of inter-State sales tax assessments was treated as valid where the notices and reopening order followed the prescribed machinery under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 and the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1941, as applied through the Central Sales Tax rules, even though the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 was not expressly named. The omission was treated as one of form, not substance, because no prejudice was shown and the assessee knew both intra-State and inter-State turnovers were under scrutiny. The reopening order was also treated as duly authorised, and the assessee&#039;s participation without protest supported waiver and estoppel by conduct. The reopening and consequential assessment proceedings were therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161348</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>