<?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>2003 (7) TMI 655 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161602</link>
    <description>Review power under section 47 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 is confined to correcting a mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to revisit a consciously taken assessment view merely because another view is possible. Penalty for delayed payment of admitted tax under the entry tax law is not automatic: the authority must exercise quasi-judicial discretion and may decline penalty where the default is technical, bona fide, or not marked by deliberate defiance of law. The review challenge also failed on sanction, limitation, and audit objection grounds, as prior sanction existed, the applicable rule distinguished successor-authority review, and an audit objection does not itself invalidate proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Feb 2014 16:37:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=344568" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 655 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161602</link>
      <description>Review power under section 47 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 is confined to correcting a mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to revisit a consciously taken assessment view merely because another view is possible. Penalty for delayed payment of admitted tax under the entry tax law is not automatic: the authority must exercise quasi-judicial discretion and may decline penalty where the default is technical, bona fide, or not marked by deliberate defiance of law. The review challenge also failed on sanction, limitation, and audit objection grounds, as prior sanction existed, the applicable rule distinguished successor-authority review, and an audit objection does not itself invalidate proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161602</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>