<?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>2008 (7) TMI 887 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163900</link>
    <description>An exemption application sent by registered post within the prescribed six-month period was held to satisfy the requirement of having been &quot;applied&quot; within time under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, where it was returned undelivered because State Government offices were affected by strike. A correctly addressed registered letter attracted the presumption of service under the Evidence Act and the Post Office Act, and the dealer had done everything possible in the circumstances. The court held that no one can be required to perform an impossible act, so the finding that the application was not made in time was legally unsustainable; the application was treated as timely and the issue was decided for the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2014 18:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352129" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 887 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163900</link>
      <description>An exemption application sent by registered post within the prescribed six-month period was held to satisfy the requirement of having been &quot;applied&quot; within time under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, where it was returned undelivered because State Government offices were affected by strike. A correctly addressed registered letter attracted the presumption of service under the Evidence Act and the Post Office Act, and the dealer had done everything possible in the circumstances. The court held that no one can be required to perform an impossible act, so the finding that the application was not made in time was legally unsustainable; the application was treated as timely and the issue was decided for the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163900</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>