<?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>2010 (6) TMI 720 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164248</link>
    <description>Aluminium plain sheets were treated as falling within entry 45(b) of Schedule II under the Assam General Sales Tax Act for the period 1 February 2000 to 18 February 2002, because the sequence of notifications showed that aluminium, read in common parlance, covered plain sheets and the residuary Schedule III applied only where no specific classification was available. The later express inclusion of aluminium plain sheets in Schedule IV did not displace that earlier classification. On that basis, revisional interference under section 36(1) was unsustainable, as the assessment under section 17(4) was not shown to be erroneous or prejudicial to Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2014 12:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353423" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 720 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164248</link>
      <description>Aluminium plain sheets were treated as falling within entry 45(b) of Schedule II under the Assam General Sales Tax Act for the period 1 February 2000 to 18 February 2002, because the sequence of notifications showed that aluminium, read in common parlance, covered plain sheets and the residuary Schedule III applied only where no specific classification was available. The later express inclusion of aluminium plain sheets in Schedule IV did not displace that earlier classification. On that basis, revisional interference under section 36(1) was unsustainable, as the assessment under section 17(4) was not shown to be erroneous or prejudicial to Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164248</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>