TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the revisional order passed under section 22A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, could be sustained when the objections raised to the notice, including limitation, were summarily rejected without proper consideration.
Analysis: The objections raised against the initiation of revisional proceedings required consideration on merits, particularly the plea of limitation, which could not be brushed aside merely by reference to the show-cause notice. A revisional authority exercising statutory power must examine the contentions raised by the affected party and record a reasoned decision. Summary rejection of the objections without dealing with their substance was improper.
Conclusion: The revisional order was not sustainable and was rightly set aside. The matter was remitted to the revisional authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law, in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The dispute was sent back for a fresh decision on the objections raised, and the assessee succeeded in having the impugned revisional order annulled.
Ratio Decidendi: A revisional authority must consider and decide the objections raised against the exercise of revisional power on merits, and a summary rejection without reasoned examination cannot be sustained.
TaxTMI 
