<?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>2005 (3) TMI 446 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105520</link>
    <description>Section 22-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act confers broad revisional power to examine any order or proceeding and pass appropriate consequential orders, including enhancement or modification of assessment. The Supreme Court held that failure by the assessing authority to levy penalty may itself constitute an error prejudicial to Revenue, and the revisional authority is not confined to correcting only matters expressly recorded in the assessment order. After notice and hearing, it may levy penalty for the first time in revision where the circumstances justify such action. The absence of a separate penalty order at assessment therefore does not bar revisional jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 10:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142558" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 446 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105520</link>
      <description>Section 22-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act confers broad revisional power to examine any order or proceeding and pass appropriate consequential orders, including enhancement or modification of assessment. The Supreme Court held that failure by the assessing authority to levy penalty may itself constitute an error prejudicial to Revenue, and the revisional authority is not confined to correcting only matters expressly recorded in the assessment order. After notice and hearing, it may levy penalty for the first time in revision where the circumstances justify such action. The absence of a separate penalty order at assessment therefore does not bar revisional jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105520</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>