<?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>2015 (4) TMI 529 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258647</link>
    <description>Where a dealer withholds regular books of account despite repeated opportunities, the assessing authority may insist on their production before supplying certified copies of seized documents and reopening reasons, because prior disclosure could facilitate manipulation of records. The Orissa HC held that the assessee was given reasonable opportunity, so the ex parte assessment did not violate natural justice. It further found that the order contained adequate recorded basis for escaped turnover and tax, including reliance on the inspection report and seized documents. The Court therefore declined to set aside the assessment, direct return of the seized material, or grant fallback liberty to appeal after writ adjudication on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2015 07:57:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=381923" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 529 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258647</link>
      <description>Where a dealer withholds regular books of account despite repeated opportunities, the assessing authority may insist on their production before supplying certified copies of seized documents and reopening reasons, because prior disclosure could facilitate manipulation of records. The Orissa HC held that the assessee was given reasonable opportunity, so the ex parte assessment did not violate natural justice. It further found that the order contained adequate recorded basis for escaped turnover and tax, including reliance on the inspection report and seized documents. The Court therefore declined to set aside the assessment, direct return of the seized material, or grant fallback liberty to appeal after writ adjudication on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258647</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>