https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259017 Reassessment orders were held unsustainable where the impugned orders did not properly refer to the notice said to have been served, the alleged date of receipt was left blank, and the notices and orders were sent together in the same cover. These defects supported the taxpayers' contention that effective notice and a fair opportunity to file objections and be heard were not provided. As the revenue could not rebut the procedural lapses, the manner of passing the orders was treated as perfunctory and contrary to fair procedure. The orders were set aside for violation of natural justice and the matters were remitted for fresh consideration after personal hearing. en-us Fri, 06 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Apr 2015 06:53:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259017 Reassessment orders were held unsustainable where the impugned orders did not properly refer to the notice said to have been served, the alleged date of receipt was left blank, and the notices and orders were sent together in the same cover. These defects supported the taxpayers' contention that effective notice and a fair opportunity to file objections and be heard were not provided. As the revenue could not rebut the procedural lapses, the manner of passing the orders was treated as perfunctory and contrary to fair procedure. The orders were set aside for violation of natural justice and the matters were remitted for fresh consideration after personal hearing. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 06 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259017