https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258773 The Madras HC considered whether an assessment based on alleged stock difference could stand without verifying the assessee's godown and place of business. The assessee had produced material asserting that the godown existed and stock details had been furnished, while the authority relied on earlier records to dispute that position. Because objections had been received, the authority was required to verify the business premises before concluding that the stock difference justified tax and penalty. The existence of the premises was relevant to correct VAT liability. The assessment order was therefore set aside and the writ petition was allowed. en-us Tue, 17 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Apr 2015 12:28:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258773 The Madras HC considered whether an assessment based on alleged stock difference could stand without verifying the assessee's godown and place of business. The assessee had produced material asserting that the godown existed and stock details had been furnished, while the authority relied on earlier records to dispute that position. Because objections had been received, the authority was required to verify the business premises before concluding that the stock difference justified tax and penalty. The existence of the premises was relevant to correct VAT liability. The assessment order was therefore set aside and the writ petition was allowed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 17 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258773