https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158655 Section 10-B limitation extensions were treated as valid where section 10-BB retrospectively protected assessments made within the extended period, even though no notice was given and reasons were not recorded before the extension. The absence of communication of the extension order to the assessee did not invalidate the assessment, because the order was an internal matter between the Commissioner and the assessing authority and no prior notice was required. A defect in the assessee's name also caused no prejudice, as the assessment and appellate orders sufficiently identified the company. The assessment was upheld and the Revenue succeeded. en-us Tue, 06 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Nov 2013 15:29:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158655 Section 10-B limitation extensions were treated as valid where section 10-BB retrospectively protected assessments made within the extended period, even though no notice was given and reasons were not recorded before the extension. The absence of communication of the extension order to the assessee did not invalidate the assessment, because the order was an internal matter between the Commissioner and the assessing authority and no prior notice was required. A defect in the assessee's name also caused no prejudice, as the assessment and appellate orders sufficiently identified the company. The assessment was upheld and the Revenue succeeded. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 06 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158655