https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161513 Sections 14(4-C) and 20 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 were upheld because the revisional powers were confined by objective jurisdictional conditions, including prejudice to revenue and escaped or under-assessed turnover, so they were not treated as arbitrary under article 14. The constitutional attack also failed because the writ petitions lacked specific pleadings and supporting material showing unconstitutional operation or actual prejudice. On the cashewnut and cashew kernel issue, the Supreme Court's declaration that they are different goods was applied without any prospective limitation, so earlier concluded assessments were not saved by prior contrary views or non-collection of tax. en-us Thu, 20 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Jan 2014 16:17:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161513 Sections 14(4-C) and 20 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 were upheld because the revisional powers were confined by objective jurisdictional conditions, including prejudice to revenue and escaped or under-assessed turnover, so they were not treated as arbitrary under article 14. The constitutional attack also failed because the writ petitions lacked specific pleadings and supporting material showing unconstitutional operation or actual prejudice. On the cashewnut and cashew kernel issue, the Supreme Court's declaration that they are different goods was applied without any prospective limitation, so earlier concluded assessments were not saved by prior contrary views or non-collection of tax. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 20 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161513