https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165739 Under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act and Rules, reassessment could be made only by an officer expressly authorised by the Commissioner, and the Court treated that authorisation as a mandatory jurisdictional that could not be inferred from informal means. An e-mail printout was found insufficient to prove the required formal empowerment, so the reassessment was without jurisdiction and void. The impugned demand notices were therefore quashed in favour of the assessee, without examining the merits of the alleged tax evasion. en-us Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Oct 2014 18:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165739 Under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act and Rules, reassessment could be made only by an officer expressly authorised by the Commissioner, and the Court treated that authorisation as a mandatory jurisdictional that could not be inferred from informal means. An e-mail printout was found insufficient to prove the required formal empowerment, so the reassessment was without jurisdiction and void. The impugned demand notices were therefore quashed in favour of the assessee, without examining the merits of the alleged tax evasion. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165739