https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150016 In fiscal reassessment proceedings, a wrong citation of the penalty provision did not invalidate an order where the authority otherwise had jurisdiction to reopen escaped turnover and levy tax. Reopening was upheld because the assessee had obtained exemption on a claim later found to be untrue, the authority had reason to believe taxable turnover had escaped assessment, and the dealer bore the burden of proving non-liability. The opportunity to inspect material and produce accounts was treated as adequate, so no breach of natural justice was found. Penalty, however, depended on the statutory basis actually invoked and the required finding of wilful non-disclosure, so that issue was left open. en-us Sat, 21 Mar 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 May 2013 18:30:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150016 In fiscal reassessment proceedings, a wrong citation of the penalty provision did not invalidate an order where the authority otherwise had jurisdiction to reopen escaped turnover and levy tax. Reopening was upheld because the assessee had obtained exemption on a claim later found to be untrue, the authority had reason to believe taxable turnover had escaped assessment, and the dealer bore the burden of proving non-liability. The opportunity to inspect material and produce accounts was treated as adequate, so no breach of natural justice was found. Penalty, however, depended on the statutory basis actually invoked and the required finding of wilful non-disclosure, so that issue was left open. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Sat, 21 Mar 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=150016