https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164048 Rule 6(3)(ii) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 applies where, in a works contract, the value of goods cannot be ascertained from the dealer's accounts; the assessee's failure to produce books despite repeated opportunities justified its application, and the challenge failed. A revisional order is not invalid merely because it was passed by a successor-Deputy Commissioner on the basis of a show-cause notice issued by a predecessor, since no fresh notice was statutorily required and written objections had been filed. In taxation matters, a personal hearing is not indispensable where written representation is sufficient and no prejudice is shown. en-us Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164048 Rule 6(3)(ii) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, 1957 applies where, in a works contract, the value of goods cannot be ascertained from the dealer's accounts; the assessee's failure to produce books despite repeated opportunities justified its application, and the challenge failed. A revisional order is not invalid merely because it was passed by a successor-Deputy Commissioner on the basis of a show-cause notice issued by a predecessor, since no fresh notice was statutorily required and written objections had been filed. In taxation matters, a personal hearing is not indispensable where written representation is sufficient and no prejudice is shown. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164048