<?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 (5) TMI 622 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163936</link>
    <description>A provisional assessment order is subordinate to the final assessment, so an appeal directed only against the provisional order becomes infructuous once the regular assessment is completed. The pendency of penalty proceedings in the final assessment does not preserve the separate appeal against the provisional assessment, because the later assessment supersedes the earlier one for appellate purposes. The Rajasthan HC relied on settled principle that the final assessment extinguishes the independent utility of the provisional-assessment challenge, and rejected any contrary result based on perceived hardship to the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2014 11:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (5) TMI 622 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163936</link>
      <description>A provisional assessment order is subordinate to the final assessment, so an appeal directed only against the provisional order becomes infructuous once the regular assessment is completed. The pendency of penalty proceedings in the final assessment does not preserve the separate appeal against the provisional assessment, because the later assessment supersedes the earlier one for appellate purposes. The Rajasthan HC relied on settled principle that the final assessment extinguishes the independent utility of the provisional-assessment challenge, and rejected any contrary result based on perceived hardship to the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163936</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>