<?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 (7) TMI 779 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161615</link>
    <description>Delay in challenging the reopening order was condoned because the assessee had pursued the reassessment and appellate proceedings and showed sufficient cause for not approaching earlier. Reopening of a deemed assessment under the sales tax law was held invalid because the authority relied only on non-payment of turnover tax, whereas the statute required satisfaction of concealment of sales or incorrect turnover particulars. The reopening order was treated as independent and not merged with the reassessment or appellate orders, so the invalid reopening could not support those later orders. The Tribunal&#039;s order was set aside and the consequential tax orders were quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Feb 2014 17:46:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=344585" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (7) TMI 779 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161615</link>
      <description>Delay in challenging the reopening order was condoned because the assessee had pursued the reassessment and appellate proceedings and showed sufficient cause for not approaching earlier. Reopening of a deemed assessment under the sales tax law was held invalid because the authority relied only on non-payment of turnover tax, whereas the statute required satisfaction of concealment of sales or incorrect turnover particulars. The reopening order was treated as independent and not merged with the reassessment or appellate orders, so the invalid reopening could not support those later orders. The Tribunal&#039;s order was set aside and the consequential tax orders were quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161615</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>