<?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 (11) TMI 828 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164283</link>
    <description>A Supreme Court declaration on the classification of bubble gum and chewing gum as unclassified items taxable at a higher rate was treated as operating retrospectively from the relevant notification date, and under Article 141 it bound authorities and courts. That later declaration justified reopening escaped-assessment proceedings under section 21(2) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, despite an earlier contrary view treating the goods as confectionery and despite a prior interim stay that had merged in the final appellate order. The proviso to section 21(2) also allowed reopening notwithstanding change of opinion, where the Commissioner recorded reasons and was satisfied that reopening was just and expedient; on that basis, material existed to form a belief of escaped turnover.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2014 08:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353516" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 828 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164283</link>
      <description>A Supreme Court declaration on the classification of bubble gum and chewing gum as unclassified items taxable at a higher rate was treated as operating retrospectively from the relevant notification date, and under Article 141 it bound authorities and courts. That later declaration justified reopening escaped-assessment proceedings under section 21(2) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, despite an earlier contrary view treating the goods as confectionery and despite a prior interim stay that had merged in the final appellate order. The proviso to section 21(2) also allowed reopening notwithstanding change of opinion, where the Commissioner recorded reasons and was satisfied that reopening was just and expedient; on that basis, material existed to form a belief of escaped turnover.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164283</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>