<?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>2009 (10) TMI 829 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164152</link>
    <description>Assessment limitation under the Orissa Sales Tax Act could not be conclusively decided on the writ record because the order-sheet and assessment record were irregularly maintained, the date of assessment appeared interpolated, and the delay in issuing and serving the order and demand notice remained unexplained. On that factual footing, the court declined to quash the assessment outright. It also held that, where the validity and date of the assessment turned on disputed questions of fact and an efficacious statutory first appeal was available, writ relief should be refused in favour of the appellate remedy. The petitioner was therefore relegated to the first appeal, with recovery kept in abeyance until disposal of that appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352718" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 829 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164152</link>
      <description>Assessment limitation under the Orissa Sales Tax Act could not be conclusively decided on the writ record because the order-sheet and assessment record were irregularly maintained, the date of assessment appeared interpolated, and the delay in issuing and serving the order and demand notice remained unexplained. On that factual footing, the court declined to quash the assessment outright. It also held that, where the validity and date of the assessment turned on disputed questions of fact and an efficacious statutory first appeal was available, writ relief should be refused in favour of the appellate remedy. The petitioner was therefore relegated to the first appeal, with recovery kept in abeyance until disposal of that appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164152</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>