https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263487 A communication treated as an order under section 52(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, if issued with the Commissioner's approval, must be dealt with under the procedure in section 52(2A); the earlier reference to section 52(2) was treated as a typographical error. The Court also clarified that it could not compel the Commissioner to review the communication. Mere membership of the petitioner association was not enough to claim the benefit of the communication; the benefit was confined to members whose activities fell within its terms. en-us Thu, 03 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Sep 2015 07:48:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263487 A communication treated as an order under section 52(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, if issued with the Commissioner's approval, must be dealt with under the procedure in section 52(2A); the earlier reference to section 52(2) was treated as a typographical error. The Court also clarified that it could not compel the Commissioner to review the communication. Mere membership of the petitioner association was not enough to claim the benefit of the communication; the benefit was confined to members whose activities fell within its terms. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 03 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263487