<?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>2023 (1) TMI 844 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433097</link>
    <description>The Tribunal&#039;s decision to reject the rectification application under Section 22 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was upheld. The Court concluded that rectification is limited to correcting patent errors and not for revisiting final decisions or debatable points of law. All revisions were dismissed, favoring the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jun 2024 17:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=702361" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 844 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433097</link>
      <description>The Tribunal&#039;s decision to reject the rectification application under Section 22 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was upheld. The Court concluded that rectification is limited to correcting patent errors and not for revisiting final decisions or debatable points of law. All revisions were dismissed, favoring the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433097</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>