<?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>2004 (5) TMI 87 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47518</link>
    <description>A special limitation regime under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 governed reference applications under Section 45(1): filing was allowed within sixty days, with a further extension of up to thirty days on sufficient cause. Section 62(2) only made Sections 4 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applicable for computing time and did not import Section 5 to condone delay beyond the statutory outer limit. The statutory scheme was treated as an express exclusion of general condonation powers after expiry of the maximum period. The Tribunal&#039;s rejection of the time-barred reference application was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Feb 2014 15:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86037" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 87 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47518</link>
      <description>A special limitation regime under the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 governed reference applications under Section 45(1): filing was allowed within sixty days, with a further extension of up to thirty days on sufficient cause. Section 62(2) only made Sections 4 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applicable for computing time and did not import Section 5 to condone delay beyond the statutory outer limit. The statutory scheme was treated as an express exclusion of general condonation powers after expiry of the maximum period. The Tribunal&#039;s rejection of the time-barred reference application was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47518</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>