<?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>1975 (2) TMI 37 - ITAT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68876</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 12(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 is not sustainable where the assessing authority had already examined the issue during assessment and recorded that penalty was not exigible. A later levy in those circumstances is treated as a mere change of opinion, not a valid reopening of a concluded decision; it may be considered only when the question was left open earlier. The proceedings were also procedurally defective because the assessee was denied an opportunity to inspect seized records and reconcile the entries before penalty was imposed. Prompt payment of tax on the relevant transactions further supported deletion of the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Apr 2011 11:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107250" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (2) TMI 37 - ITAT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68876</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 12(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 is not sustainable where the assessing authority had already examined the issue during assessment and recorded that penalty was not exigible. A later levy in those circumstances is treated as a mere change of opinion, not a valid reopening of a concluded decision; it may be considered only when the question was left open earlier. The proceedings were also procedurally defective because the assessee was denied an opportunity to inspect seized records and reconcile the entries before penalty was imposed. Prompt payment of tax on the relevant transactions further supported deletion of the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68876</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>