<?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>2011 (8) TMI 1034 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166312</link>
    <description>Section 16D of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act confers only limited supervisory jurisdiction to correct patent illegality, a statutory bar, or a breach of natural justice, and it is not a substitute for appellate review on the merits. The challenge concerned the applicability of section 3(3) and entitlement to issue form XVII for consumables, but that dispute was held to fall within the statutory appellate remedy rather than supervisory interference. The record also showed no denial of opportunity or other natural justice violation. On that basis, the Special Committee was justified in declining to examine the assessment on merits, and interference with the assessment order was not warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2014 16:07:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=369769" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 1034 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166312</link>
      <description>Section 16D of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act confers only limited supervisory jurisdiction to correct patent illegality, a statutory bar, or a breach of natural justice, and it is not a substitute for appellate review on the merits. The challenge concerned the applicability of section 3(3) and entitlement to issue form XVII for consumables, but that dispute was held to fall within the statutory appellate remedy rather than supervisory interference. The record also showed no denial of opportunity or other natural justice violation. On that basis, the Special Committee was justified in declining to examine the assessment on merits, and interference with the assessment order was not warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166312</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>