<?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 (8) TMI 848 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164988</link>
    <description>A reassessment notice issued under section 35 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 was invalid because it was served after the five-year limitation period had expired. The relevant financial year ended on 31 March 1992, so limitation ran from that date and expired on 31 March 1997. As the notice was issued only on 3 February 1999, it was time-barred and could not be sustained. The Court therefore quashed the notice and found it unnecessary to consider the other objections raised.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 May 2014 12:30:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=355084" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 848 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164988</link>
      <description>A reassessment notice issued under section 35 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 was invalid because it was served after the five-year limitation period had expired. The relevant financial year ended on 31 March 1992, so limitation ran from that date and expired on 31 March 1997. As the notice was issued only on 3 February 1999, it was time-barred and could not be sustained. The Court therefore quashed the notice and found it unnecessary to consider the other objections raised.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164988</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>