https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278703 Rule 6(5) of the Central Sales Tax (Kerala) Rules was construed as fixing the stage for assessment after the close of the year, not as creating a one-year limitation for completing assessment; the references to re-assessment in Rule 6(7) and Rule 6(8) did not convert it into a limitation provision. On review, the court reiterated that review jurisdiction is narrow and cannot substitute for appeal, and no error apparent on the face of the record was shown because the later challenge was outside the case originally pleaded and argued. The review petitions therefore failed and the earlier decision remained undisturbed. en-us Wed, 29 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Feb 2019 06:31:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278703 Rule 6(5) of the Central Sales Tax (Kerala) Rules was construed as fixing the stage for assessment after the close of the year, not as creating a one-year limitation for completing assessment; the references to re-assessment in Rule 6(7) and Rule 6(8) did not convert it into a limitation provision. On review, the court reiterated that review jurisdiction is narrow and cannot substitute for appeal, and no error apparent on the face of the record was shown because the later challenge was outside the case originally pleaded and argued. The review petitions therefore failed and the earlier decision remained undisturbed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 29 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278703