https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294519 The 1969 amendments to the Central Sales Tax Act were upheld as a valid scheme linking Central tax liability to the State sales tax framework and its procedural machinery, with the expression "sales tax law" extending to later State amendments. The validating clause did not bar fresh rectification where the statute continued to permit correction of an earlier refund-based order. Rule 38 of the Mysore Sales Tax Rules was held wide enough to rectify a prior rectification within five years from the relevant mistake, so the notice was within time. Section 8(2A) did not preserve exemption for inter-State cotton sales after section 6(1A), as the provisions operated in different fields and the charging provision prevailed. en-us Mon, 22 Dec 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Apr 2021 15:32:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294519 The 1969 amendments to the Central Sales Tax Act were upheld as a valid scheme linking Central tax liability to the State sales tax framework and its procedural machinery, with the expression "sales tax law" extending to later State amendments. The validating clause did not bar fresh rectification where the statute continued to permit correction of an earlier refund-based order. Rule 38 of the Mysore Sales Tax Rules was held wide enough to rectify a prior rectification within five years from the relevant mistake, so the notice was within time. Section 8(2A) did not preserve exemption for inter-State cotton sales after section 6(1A), as the provisions operated in different fields and the charging provision prevailed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 22 Dec 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294519