<?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 (5) TMI 454 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233869</link>
    <description>Repeated notices, personal hearing opportunities and service attempts including affixture supported the view that the company petitioners did not effectively co-operate in producing books of account, so the assessment and penalty orders were sustained and no interference under Article 226 was warranted. By contrast, the individual proprietor had replied to pre-assessment notices, sought time to produce accounts, and the delay in finalising assessment was largely attributable to the department; in those facts, finalising the assessment without a meaningful further opportunity breached natural justice, so the assessment order and consequential revenue recovery notices were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after notice and hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 10:06:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=196283" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (5) TMI 454 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233869</link>
      <description>Repeated notices, personal hearing opportunities and service attempts including affixture supported the view that the company petitioners did not effectively co-operate in producing books of account, so the assessment and penalty orders were sustained and no interference under Article 226 was warranted. By contrast, the individual proprietor had replied to pre-assessment notices, sought time to produce accounts, and the delay in finalising assessment was largely attributable to the department; in those facts, finalising the assessment without a meaningful further opportunity breached natural justice, so the assessment order and consequential revenue recovery notices were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after notice and hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233869</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>