<?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>2011 (5) TMI 876 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165858</link>
    <description>Service of the pre-assessment proposition notice in the manner prescribed by the Rules was treated as a condition precedent to completing the assessment. Because valid service on the petitioner was not proved, and there was no showing that the recipient was an authorised agent, the petitioner was denied a proper opportunity to object; the assessment was therefore held unsustainable for breach of mandatory procedure and natural justice. The existence of an alternate appellate remedy did not bar writ relief where the impugned action suffered from a fundamental procedural defect. The assessment order, consequential demand and recovery notice were quashed, and the matter was remitted for fresh assessment after valid service and opportunity to respond.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=362956" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 876 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165858</link>
      <description>Service of the pre-assessment proposition notice in the manner prescribed by the Rules was treated as a condition precedent to completing the assessment. Because valid service on the petitioner was not proved, and there was no showing that the recipient was an authorised agent, the petitioner was denied a proper opportunity to object; the assessment was therefore held unsustainable for breach of mandatory procedure and natural justice. The existence of an alternate appellate remedy did not bar writ relief where the impugned action suffered from a fundamental procedural defect. The assessment order, consequential demand and recovery notice were quashed, and the matter was remitted for fresh assessment after valid service and opportunity to respond.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165858</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>