<?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 (5) TMI 435 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327454</link>
    <description>A detention order under section 70A of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was held unsustainable where the goods were shown in transit under Form 405, the notice was addressed only to the driver, and the statutory procedure for seeking information and granting a hearing was not followed. The authority&#039;s notice did not clearly invoke the information requirement contemplated by section 70A, the order proceeded on a different factual basis from the notice, and it incorrectly recorded service on the transporter. The record also showed blanks, inconsistency, and lack of application of mind. The order was quashed and set aside, and relief was granted to the petitioners.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427777" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 435 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327454</link>
      <description>A detention order under section 70A of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was held unsustainable where the goods were shown in transit under Form 405, the notice was addressed only to the driver, and the statutory procedure for seeking information and granting a hearing was not followed. The authority&#039;s notice did not clearly invoke the information requirement contemplated by section 70A, the order proceeded on a different factual basis from the notice, and it incorrectly recorded service on the transporter. The record also showed blanks, inconsistency, and lack of application of mind. The order was quashed and set aside, and relief was granted to the petitioners.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327454</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>