https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253563 The court held that the VAT Tribunal erred in applying the extended limitation period without the Commissioner recording "reasons to believe" for non-payment of tax. The appeal was decided in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the significance of procedural adherence and the mandatory requirement for the Commissioner to justify the extension under the DVAT Act. The judgment highlighted that the Objection Hearing Authority lacks jurisdiction to record "reasons to believe," reiterating the essentiality of explicit reasoning for invoking the extended limitation period. en-us Fri, 26 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Apr 2016 13:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253563 The court held that the VAT Tribunal erred in applying the extended limitation period without the Commissioner recording "reasons to believe" for non-payment of tax. The appeal was decided in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the significance of procedural adherence and the mandatory requirement for the Commissioner to justify the extension under the DVAT Act. The judgment highlighted that the Objection Hearing Authority lacks jurisdiction to record "reasons to believe," reiterating the essentiality of explicit reasoning for invoking the extended limitation period. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 26 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253563