https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192267 Reassessment was upheld as within jurisdiction because the assessment dated 09.01.2014 was treated as a scrutiny assessment made after calling for and examining books of account, not a deemed assessment based only on returns. The Commissioner's later order under the governing rule was treated as express authorisation for the transferee officer to reassess the relevant VAT year, satisfying the jurisdictional requirement. The objection that the earlier audit reference mentioned CST rather than VAT was rejected because the operative part of the authorisation specifically covered the VAT transaction. Reassessment was therefore valid, and the challenge to the notice and reassessment order failed. en-us Fri, 24 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Mar 2025 17:55:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192267 Reassessment was upheld as within jurisdiction because the assessment dated 09.01.2014 was treated as a scrutiny assessment made after calling for and examining books of account, not a deemed assessment based only on returns. The Commissioner's later order under the governing rule was treated as express authorisation for the transferee officer to reassess the relevant VAT year, satisfying the jurisdictional requirement. The objection that the earlier audit reference mentioned CST rather than VAT was rejected because the operative part of the authorisation specifically covered the VAT transaction. Reassessment was therefore valid, and the challenge to the notice and reassessment order failed. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Fri, 24 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192267