<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (7) TMI 1170 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164288</link>
    <description>For reopening or reassessment under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, the authority must have relevant material creating a bona fide prima facie belief that turnover may have escaped assessment; the adequacy or sufficiency of that material is not examined at the notice stage. The Court found that the survey report and the statement recorded during survey constituted relevant material, and treated the petitioner&#039;s explanation about another unit as an afterthought. No illegality was shown in the permission granted under Section 21(2), so the reassessment notice was upheld and the writ petitions failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2014 19:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353521" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 1170 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164288</link>
      <description>For reopening or reassessment under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, the authority must have relevant material creating a bona fide prima facie belief that turnover may have escaped assessment; the adequacy or sufficiency of that material is not examined at the notice stage. The Court found that the survey report and the statement recorded during survey constituted relevant material, and treated the petitioner&#039;s explanation about another unit as an afterthought. No illegality was shown in the permission granted under Section 21(2), so the reassessment notice was upheld and the writ petitions failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164288</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>