https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164284 On reassessment after the Tribunal's remand, the six-month limitation under section 21(5) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act applied to the fresh assessment orders, and time ran from when the assessing authority acquired knowledge of the appellate order; on the facts, the orders were therefore not invalid for limitation. The Court also held that writ relief under article 226 is discretionary and may be refused where the petitioner suppresses material facts, repeatedly seeks adjournments, and fails to cooperate in the reassessment. In view of that conduct, the petitioner was disentitled to interference in writ jurisdiction and the challenge to the reassessment failed. en-us Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Oct 2014 08:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164284 On reassessment after the Tribunal's remand, the six-month limitation under section 21(5) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act applied to the fresh assessment orders, and time ran from when the assessing authority acquired knowledge of the appellate order; on the facts, the orders were therefore not invalid for limitation. The Court also held that writ relief under article 226 is discretionary and may be refused where the petitioner suppresses material facts, repeatedly seeks adjournments, and fails to cooperate in the reassessment. In view of that conduct, the petitioner was disentitled to interference in writ jurisdiction and the challenge to the reassessment failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164284