<?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 (12) TMI 585 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161738</link>
    <description>Section 35 revisional power under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act is distinct from reassessment power under section 19, and it is not confined to materials already before the assessing authority. The Deputy Commissioner may consider materials gathered after assessment and interfere where the order is vitiated by illegality, irregularity or impropriety. The court also held that, once the original assessment had been modified in appeal and given effect to, the operative order for revision was the revised assessment order rather than the original. On that basis, the revisional action to bring escaped turnover to tax was upheld as within jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2014 14:57:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=345010" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 585 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161738</link>
      <description>Section 35 revisional power under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act is distinct from reassessment power under section 19, and it is not confined to materials already before the assessing authority. The Deputy Commissioner may consider materials gathered after assessment and interfere where the order is vitiated by illegality, irregularity or impropriety. The court also held that, once the original assessment had been modified in appeal and given effect to, the operative order for revision was the revised assessment order rather than the original. On that basis, the revisional action to bring escaped turnover to tax was upheld as within jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161738</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>