https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189635 Section 28(1) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 could not be invoked against an already registered dealer who sought amendment of the registration certificate to include an additional place of business. The court noted that a dealer with more than one place of business in different circles must seek registration-related amendment before the Commissioner, and the deeming provision treated the dealer as having valid registration from the date of application. Because the branch was only part of an existing registered business, it could not be treated as an unregistered dealer evading registration. The assessment and penalty order, being based on an erroneous view of law and without jurisdiction, was set aside, and the writ petition was maintainable despite an alternative statutory remedy. en-us Fri, 16 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jan 2017 10:50:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189635 Section 28(1) of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 could not be invoked against an already registered dealer who sought amendment of the registration certificate to include an additional place of business. The court noted that a dealer with more than one place of business in different circles must seek registration-related amendment before the Commissioner, and the deeming provision treated the dealer as having valid registration from the date of application. Because the branch was only part of an existing registered business, it could not be treated as an unregistered dealer evading registration. The assessment and penalty order, being based on an erroneous view of law and without jurisdiction, was set aside, and the writ petition was maintainable despite an alternative statutory remedy. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 16 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189635