https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159021 A challenge to penalty proceedings under section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 failed because the record showed notice, time to reply, and consideration of the dealer's objections and stock reconciliation materials before the penalty was modified. The authorities also found that complete accounts were not maintained or produced, supporting the penalty action. On these facts, the plea of denial of reasonable opportunity was not sustainable, and no jurisdictional or procedural defect was shown to justify interference under article 226. en-us Tue, 26 Sep 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Nov 2013 15:22:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159021 A challenge to penalty proceedings under section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 failed because the record showed notice, time to reply, and consideration of the dealer's objections and stock reconciliation materials before the penalty was modified. The authorities also found that complete accounts were not maintained or produced, supporting the penalty action. On these facts, the plea of denial of reasonable opportunity was not sustainable, and no jurisdictional or procedural defect was shown to justify interference under article 226. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 26 Sep 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159021