https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160472 Reassessment notices under section 11-E(2) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 were treated as valid where they disclosed the Commissioner's prima facie satisfaction about incorrect turnover particulars and identified the alleged tax shortfall; imperfect wording such as using "evading" instead of "reduction" did not by itself vitiate the notice, so the dealer could seek further particulars and respond. On the record, a completed assessment under section 11(1) for the relevant period was not established because no prescribed notice, endorsed forms, assessment order, or demand notice was produced. The reopening notices were upheld, while the reopening orders were quashed and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law. en-us Fri, 09 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:30:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160472 Reassessment notices under section 11-E(2) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 were treated as valid where they disclosed the Commissioner's prima facie satisfaction about incorrect turnover particulars and identified the alleged tax shortfall; imperfect wording such as using "evading" instead of "reduction" did not by itself vitiate the notice, so the dealer could seek further particulars and respond. On the record, a completed assessment under section 11(1) for the relevant period was not established because no prescribed notice, endorsed forms, assessment order, or demand notice was produced. The reopening notices were upheld, while the reopening orders were quashed and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 09 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160472