<?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>2003 (2) TMI 197 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100699</link>
    <description>Defective or irregular service of notice in reassessment proceedings does not, by itself, vitiate the proceedings where the statute requires only a reasonable opportunity of being heard and no prejudice is shown. The decisive test is whether the assessee suffered prejudice; if service was impracticable because of the assessee&#039;s conduct, or the irregularity caused no prejudice, reassessment remains valid. The text also notes that, where breach of natural justice is established, an appellate authority may in appropriate cases set aside the order and direct a de novo decision. On that basis, the direction for fresh reassessment was upheld and the contrary view was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2016 16:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137750" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (2) TMI 197 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100699</link>
      <description>Defective or irregular service of notice in reassessment proceedings does not, by itself, vitiate the proceedings where the statute requires only a reasonable opportunity of being heard and no prejudice is shown. The decisive test is whether the assessee suffered prejudice; if service was impracticable because of the assessee&#039;s conduct, or the irregularity caused no prejudice, reassessment remains valid. The text also notes that, where breach of natural justice is established, an appellate authority may in appropriate cases set aside the order and direct a de novo decision. On that basis, the direction for fresh reassessment was upheld and the contrary view was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100699</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>