<?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>2008 (1) TMI 872 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172371</link>
    <description>A rectification application filed under section 25(A) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was treated as accepted by operation of law because the respondent failed to decide it within the prescribed time. The statutory proviso entitled the assessee to deemed acceptance on inaction, and the Court did not examine the merits of the assessment dispute. As the rectification stood accepted, the subsequent demand notice for the assessment year 2004-05 was unsustainable and was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2015 10:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=394003" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (1) TMI 872 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172371</link>
      <description>A rectification application filed under section 25(A) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was treated as accepted by operation of law because the respondent failed to decide it within the prescribed time. The statutory proviso entitled the assessee to deemed acceptance on inaction, and the Court did not examine the merits of the assessment dispute. As the rectification stood accepted, the subsequent demand notice for the assessment year 2004-05 was unsustainable and was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172371</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>