<?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 (8) TMI 476 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331092</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the Writ Petition challenging the respondent&#039;s assessment based on a Web-report obtained without the petitioner&#039;s knowledge. Despite the petitioner&#039;s argument on lack of jurisdiction and improper reliance, the Court found that the respondent had followed due process by providing opportunities for the petitioner to respond. Emphasizing the petitioner&#039;s failure to engage and counter the allegations, the Court upheld the validity of the assessment order, stating that the petitioner could have pursued alternative legal remedies within the specified timeframe. The importance of complying with procedural requirements and actively participating in the legal process was highlighted in the Court&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:35:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=438141" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 476 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331092</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the Writ Petition challenging the respondent&#039;s assessment based on a Web-report obtained without the petitioner&#039;s knowledge. Despite the petitioner&#039;s argument on lack of jurisdiction and improper reliance, the Court found that the respondent had followed due process by providing opportunities for the petitioner to respond. Emphasizing the petitioner&#039;s failure to engage and counter the allegations, the Court upheld the validity of the assessment order, stating that the petitioner could have pursued alternative legal remedies within the specified timeframe. The importance of complying with procedural requirements and actively participating in the legal process was highlighted in the Court&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331092</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>