<?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>2007 (8) TMI 701 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163954</link>
    <description>An appeal under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act must be filed within sixty days from service of the order, and delay may be condoned on sufficient cause. The Tribunal&#039;s procedural rules also contemplate notice to cure defects and, where required, an opportunity of hearing before rejection. On the stated facts, the appeal was treated as time-barred and not maintainable without giving the assessee a chance to regularize the papers or seek condonation, even though limitation was reckoned from receipt of the appellate order. The rejection was therefore legally infirm, and the matter was remitted for consideration on merits after re-presentation of the appeal papers.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 14:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352271" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 701 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163954</link>
      <description>An appeal under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act must be filed within sixty days from service of the order, and delay may be condoned on sufficient cause. The Tribunal&#039;s procedural rules also contemplate notice to cure defects and, where required, an opportunity of hearing before rejection. On the stated facts, the appeal was treated as time-barred and not maintainable without giving the assessee a chance to regularize the papers or seek condonation, even though limitation was reckoned from receipt of the appellate order. The rejection was therefore legally infirm, and the matter was remitted for consideration on merits after re-presentation of the appeal papers.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163954</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>