<?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>2005 (6) TMI 527 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161850</link>
    <description>Section 42-A of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 gives the Commissioner only a general administrative power to issue directions to subordinate officers for proper administration of the Act. It does not authorise control over an assessing authority&#039;s statutory or quasi-judicial function in an individual case, and it does not create any enforceable right in a dealer to seek a case-specific clarification on rate of tax or assessment. The comparison with section 42-B of the Madhya Pradesh Act was rejected because that provision expressly required determination of disputed rate issues. Accordingly, the dealer could not compel such directions, and the writ challenge to the Commissioner&#039;s communication was not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2014 18:34:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=345367" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (6) TMI 527 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161850</link>
      <description>Section 42-A of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 gives the Commissioner only a general administrative power to issue directions to subordinate officers for proper administration of the Act. It does not authorise control over an assessing authority&#039;s statutory or quasi-judicial function in an individual case, and it does not create any enforceable right in a dealer to seek a case-specific clarification on rate of tax or assessment. The comparison with section 42-B of the Madhya Pradesh Act was rejected because that provision expressly required determination of disputed rate issues. Accordingly, the dealer could not compel such directions, and the writ challenge to the Commissioner&#039;s communication was not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161850</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>