<?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>2017 (8) TMI 50 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345992</link>
    <description>Section 55 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 confines rectification to an error apparent on the face of the record within the prescribed period, and it cannot be used to re-examine the merits of an earlier appellate order. A rectification authority must address only the specific mistake pointed out and cannot undertake detailed reasoning, investigation, or reconsideration that belongs in appeal or revision. The authority in question went beyond this limited jurisdiction by revisiting the earlier decision instead of testing whether an apparent error existed. The writ petition was allowed and the rectification request was remanded for fresh consideration within the narrow scope of Section 55.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2017 08:38:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=484025" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 50 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345992</link>
      <description>Section 55 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 confines rectification to an error apparent on the face of the record within the prescribed period, and it cannot be used to re-examine the merits of an earlier appellate order. A rectification authority must address only the specific mistake pointed out and cannot undertake detailed reasoning, investigation, or reconsideration that belongs in appeal or revision. The authority in question went beyond this limited jurisdiction by revisiting the earlier decision instead of testing whether an apparent error existed. The writ petition was allowed and the rectification request was remanded for fresh consideration within the narrow scope of Section 55.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345992</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>