https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163036 A disclosure-based proviso under rule 3(2)(c) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules was treated as a procedural condition for claiming the statutory discount benefit under section 30, because it regulated proof of entitlement without imposing any new tax burden. The Court held that the proviso applied uniformly to all assessees and was neither discriminatory nor ultra vires the Act. On the reassessment challenge, the Court found that the assessee had notice and that the alleged procedural lapse did not justify writ interference, particularly where statutory remedies remained available. The writ petition therefore failed and the assessee was relegated to the appellate remedy under the Act. en-us Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Dec 2014 13:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163036 A disclosure-based proviso under rule 3(2)(c) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules was treated as a procedural condition for claiming the statutory discount benefit under section 30, because it regulated proof of entitlement without imposing any new tax burden. The Court held that the proviso applied uniformly to all assessees and was neither discriminatory nor ultra vires the Act. On the reassessment challenge, the Court found that the assessee had notice and that the alleged procedural lapse did not justify writ interference, particularly where statutory remedies remained available. The writ petition therefore failed and the assessee was relegated to the appellate remedy under the Act. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163036