https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167663 A return showing granite metal at 4% instead of the amended 12.5% rate was treated as an incorrect return attracting penalty under section 67 of the Kerala VAT Act. A later revised return filed after penalty proceedings had begun could not be accepted, because sections 22(9) and 79B barred such revision once penal action was initiated. Acceptance of settlement fee under section 22(5) did not exclude penalty, and the assessee's plea of ignorance of the amendment did not justify the misclassification. The penalty was upheld, but its quantum was reduced. en-us Thu, 21 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Jan 2015 08:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167663 A return showing granite metal at 4% instead of the amended 12.5% rate was treated as an incorrect return attracting penalty under section 67 of the Kerala VAT Act. A later revised return filed after penalty proceedings had begun could not be accepted, because sections 22(9) and 79B barred such revision once penal action was initiated. Acceptance of settlement fee under section 22(5) did not exclude penalty, and the assessee's plea of ignorance of the amendment did not justify the misclassification. The penalty was upheld, but its quantum was reduced. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 21 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167663