<?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 (7) TMI 821 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235663</link>
    <description>An assessment under Section 25 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act could not be sustained where the dealer specifically requested a personal hearing in response to the pre-assessment notice and the authority failed to grant it. The omission to afford that hearing was treated as contrary to the statutory requirement and binding precedent, because personal hearing is a meaningful procedural safeguard rather than a formality in such proceedings. The assessment order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=198073" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (7) TMI 821 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235663</link>
      <description>An assessment under Section 25 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act could not be sustained where the dealer specifically requested a personal hearing in response to the pre-assessment notice and the authority failed to grant it. The omission to afford that hearing was treated as contrary to the statutory requirement and binding precedent, because personal hearing is a meaningful procedural safeguard rather than a formality in such proceedings. The assessment order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235663</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>