Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
The HC held that the four-year limitation period u/s 64 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, pertains to the initiation of revisional proceedings by the Additional Commissioner and not the passing of the final order. In the instant case, the revisional proceedings were initiated within the four-year period from the original order's date, and thus, the Additional Commissioner had jurisdiction to pass the revisional order, even after the expiry of four years from the original order.
The HC held that the four-year limitation period u/s 64 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, pertains to the initiation of revisional proceedings by the Additional Commissioner and not the passing of the final order. In the instant case, the revisional proceedings were initiated within the four-year period from the original order's date, and thus, the Additional Commissioner had jurisdiction to pass the revisional order, even after the expiry of four years from the original order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
