<?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>2016 (4) TMI 1061 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326947</link>
    <description>Assessment orders based solely on an enforcement proposal were challenged on the ground that the assessing authority had not independently considered the assessee&#039;s returns and reply. The article notes that the assessment was treated as completed by deeming fiction under Section 22(2), and revision was initiated under Section 27 on information from the departmental website. It also states that the issue had already been decided in an earlier case and, absent any interim stay, the authority was required to examine the returns and material on its own merits rather than merely adopt the enforcement wing&#039;s proposal. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 10:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=425979" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 1061 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326947</link>
      <description>Assessment orders based solely on an enforcement proposal were challenged on the ground that the assessing authority had not independently considered the assessee&#039;s returns and reply. The article notes that the assessment was treated as completed by deeming fiction under Section 22(2), and revision was initiated under Section 27 on information from the departmental website. It also states that the issue had already been decided in an earlier case and, absent any interim stay, the authority was required to examine the returns and material on its own merits rather than merely adopt the enforcement wing&#039;s proposal. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326947</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>