<?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>2006 (7) TMI 637 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163659</link>
    <description>Section 36 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was treated as exhaustive on delay condonation: an appeal had to be filed within 120 days, and the Tribunal could admit a delayed appeal only within a further 120 days on sufficient cause. The Madras HC stated that once the statute fixes this outer limit of 240 days, the Tribunal has no residual power to condone delay beyond it. The impugned orders were therefore held to be without statutory authority and liable to be set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2014 10:57:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=351476" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 637 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163659</link>
      <description>Section 36 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act was treated as exhaustive on delay condonation: an appeal had to be filed within 120 days, and the Tribunal could admit a delayed appeal only within a further 120 days on sufficient cause. The Madras HC stated that once the statute fixes this outer limit of 240 days, the Tribunal has no residual power to condone delay beyond it. The impugned orders were therefore held to be without statutory authority and liable to be set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163659</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>