https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162991 Section 26 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act was upheld against the constitutional challenge because it was construed as applying only where a person is actually carrying on business in the name of or in association with another, so the inclusion of a guarantor did not by itself make the provision unconstitutional. However, the penalty orders were quashed because the authority relied only on the fact that the person had stood as guarantor and furnished collateral, which was not a relevant basis to form the required reason to believe that the statutory condition was met. The objections were also not considered and no hearing was given, amounting to breach of natural justice. en-us Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Dec 2014 17:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162991 Section 26 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act was upheld against the constitutional challenge because it was construed as applying only where a person is actually carrying on business in the name of or in association with another, so the inclusion of a guarantor did not by itself make the provision unconstitutional. However, the penalty orders were quashed because the authority relied only on the fact that the person had stood as guarantor and furnished collateral, which was not a relevant basis to form the required reason to believe that the statutory condition was met. The objections were also not considered and no hearing was given, amounting to breach of natural justice. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162991