<?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 (11) TMI 596 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167980</link>
    <description>A show-cause notice for VAT assessment issued under valid statutory authorization was not vitiated merely because the authorizing officer had not recorded reasons, as the applicable rule did not require such recording and no procedural illegality was shown. The writ challenge also failed because the matter was still at the threshold stage and the assessee had not yet responded to the notice; the assessee retained the right to file objections and seek consideration before the assessing authority. In the absence of a clear case of total lack of jurisdiction, writ interference was unwarranted and the statutory assessment process was allowed to continue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 22:09:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373109" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (11) TMI 596 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167980</link>
      <description>A show-cause notice for VAT assessment issued under valid statutory authorization was not vitiated merely because the authorizing officer had not recorded reasons, as the applicable rule did not require such recording and no procedural illegality was shown. The writ challenge also failed because the matter was still at the threshold stage and the assessee had not yet responded to the notice; the assessee retained the right to file objections and seek consideration before the assessing authority. In the absence of a clear case of total lack of jurisdiction, writ interference was unwarranted and the statutory assessment process was allowed to continue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167980</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>