<?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>2013 (4) TMI 429 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=226199</link>
    <description>The assessment and penalty proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Tax on Luxuries in Hotels and Lodging Houses Act were vitiated because the proprietor was not given the personal hearing required before tax was determined and penalty imposed. The objections had sought documents and cross-examination, and the authority proceeded to issue a tax demand and penalty without affording the statutory hearing. Compliance with the hearing requirement and natural justice was mandatory, so the impugned proceedings were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after personal hearing. The request for cross-examination was not finally decided and was left to the authority&#039;s discretion on remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Apr 2013 21:20:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195582" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 429 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=226199</link>
      <description>The assessment and penalty proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Tax on Luxuries in Hotels and Lodging Houses Act were vitiated because the proprietor was not given the personal hearing required before tax was determined and penalty imposed. The objections had sought documents and cross-examination, and the authority proceeded to issue a tax demand and penalty without affording the statutory hearing. Compliance with the hearing requirement and natural justice was mandatory, so the impugned proceedings were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after personal hearing. The request for cross-examination was not finally decided and was left to the authority&#039;s discretion on remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=226199</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>