<?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>2000 (3) TMI 992 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105251</link>
    <description>Where an ex parte assessment is set aside for want of notice and breach of natural justice, the appellate authority may direct the assessing officer to redo the matter de novo on merits. The text states that once the absence of notice is established, the appellate forum is competent to annul the assessment and require a fresh decision, rather than treating the defect as merely factual. The contrary view taken by the Tribunal was held erroneous, and the High Court should not have treated the issue as only one of fact.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2014 10:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142289" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (3) TMI 992 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105251</link>
      <description>Where an ex parte assessment is set aside for want of notice and breach of natural justice, the appellate authority may direct the assessing officer to redo the matter de novo on merits. The text states that once the absence of notice is established, the appellate forum is competent to annul the assessment and require a fresh decision, rather than treating the defect as merely factual. The contrary view taken by the Tribunal was held erroneous, and the High Court should not have treated the issue as only one of fact.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105251</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>