https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162165 A garnishee notice under section 17(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act was not invalid merely because the copy to the dealer was forwarded one day after service on the garnishee; the provision required forwarding within a reasonable time, not necessarily before or simultaneously, and no prejudice was shown. Coercive recovery was also permissible while revision petitions against refusal of stay were pending, because no subsisting stay order restrained recovery after the stay applications had been rejected by the first appellate authority. In the absence of any legal impediment, the assessing authority could recover admitted tax arrears, and the challenge based on illegality or arbitrariness failed. en-us Fri, 13 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:31:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162165 A garnishee notice under section 17(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act was not invalid merely because the copy to the dealer was forwarded one day after service on the garnishee; the provision required forwarding within a reasonable time, not necessarily before or simultaneously, and no prejudice was shown. Coercive recovery was also permissible while revision petitions against refusal of stay were pending, because no subsisting stay order restrained recovery after the stay applications had been rejected by the first appellate authority. In the absence of any legal impediment, the assessing authority could recover admitted tax arrears, and the challenge based on illegality or arbitrariness failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 13 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162165