https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185335 Revisional notices under Section 40 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act were invalid because they were issued after the five-year limitation period had expired. The later amendment extending the outer limit to eight years did not apply, as it was confined to cases where review, revision or corrective action had been delayed or blocked by a judgment or decree of a court or tribunal. The record showed no such judicial impediment, so the extended period could not revive an already time-barred exercise of revisional power. The impugned notices were therefore without jurisdiction. en-us Wed, 20 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Aug 2016 11:16:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185335 Revisional notices under Section 40 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act were invalid because they were issued after the five-year limitation period had expired. The later amendment extending the outer limit to eight years did not apply, as it was confined to cases where review, revision or corrective action had been delayed or blocked by a judgment or decree of a court or tribunal. The record showed no such judicial impediment, so the extended period could not revive an already time-barred exercise of revisional power. The impugned notices were therefore without jurisdiction. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 20 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185335