https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161898 A revision under section 38-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was not barred merely because no limitation period had been prescribed under the first proviso; the absence of a prescribed time limit meant the proviso did not operate to defeat the remedy, and the dismissal on that ground was quashed. Because the Special Tribunal was stated to be non-functional, the assessee was also allowed to pursue the statutory appeal under section 36 if filed within one month, with no objection on limitation, while the mandatory pre-deposit requirement continued to apply. The writ petition was thus allowed in part and the appellate remedy preserved on compliance with statutory conditions. en-us Wed, 15 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Feb 2014 17:20:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161898 A revision under section 38-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was not barred merely because no limitation period had been prescribed under the first proviso; the absence of a prescribed time limit meant the proviso did not operate to defeat the remedy, and the dismissal on that ground was quashed. Because the Special Tribunal was stated to be non-functional, the assessee was also allowed to pursue the statutory appeal under section 36 if filed within one month, with no objection on limitation, while the mandatory pre-deposit requirement continued to apply. The writ petition was thus allowed in part and the appellate remedy preserved on compliance with statutory conditions. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 15 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161898