<?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>2014 (4) TMI 879 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246910</link>
    <description>Statutory review under the sales tax law was unavailable because the applicant failed to show any new and important matter that, despite due diligence, could not have been produced earlier. A subsequent collateral penalty order concerning the alleged first seller did not justify reopening the final revisional decision, especially when the supposed supporting orders were already unavailable or had been reversed. The Court held that the intelligence officer could not disregard or alter the effect of the final revisional judgment through collateral proceedings, and the review petition was not maintainable on the grounds urged.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2014 14:04:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353915" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (4) TMI 879 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246910</link>
      <description>Statutory review under the sales tax law was unavailable because the applicant failed to show any new and important matter that, despite due diligence, could not have been produced earlier. A subsequent collateral penalty order concerning the alleged first seller did not justify reopening the final revisional decision, especially when the supposed supporting orders were already unavailable or had been reversed. The Court held that the intelligence officer could not disregard or alter the effect of the final revisional judgment through collateral proceedings, and the review petition was not maintainable on the grounds urged.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246910</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>