<?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>1995 (7) TMI 403 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158812</link>
    <description>Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act permits reassessment where turnover has escaped assessment, but the notice must disclose the prima facie reasons so the dealer can respond effectively. Here, the show cause notice set out the business particulars, inspection materials, proposed revision for the relevant assessment year, and invited objections, documents, and a personal hearing. Read as a whole, it reflected only a proposal based on a preliminary basis for action, not a concluded finding against the dealer. The isolated remark suggesting suspicion about the transaction&#039;s bona fides did not show a pre-conceived or foreclosed mind. The notice was therefore upheld and not quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Nov 2013 16:20:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=334858" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (7) TMI 403 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158812</link>
      <description>Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act permits reassessment where turnover has escaped assessment, but the notice must disclose the prima facie reasons so the dealer can respond effectively. Here, the show cause notice set out the business particulars, inspection materials, proposed revision for the relevant assessment year, and invited objections, documents, and a personal hearing. Read as a whole, it reflected only a proposal based on a preliminary basis for action, not a concluded finding against the dealer. The isolated remark suggesting suspicion about the transaction&#039;s bona fides did not show a pre-conceived or foreclosed mind. The notice was therefore upheld and not quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158812</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>