https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192374 Prima facie sanction under section 29(7) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 was treated as sufficient to authorise reassessment where the Commissioner recorded satisfaction that the disputed tractor hood item may have been wrongly classified. The HC declined to test the correctness of that classification at the writ stage because the proviso dispenses with a pre-decisional hearing and the merits are to be examined by the assessing authority in reassessment. The sanction and reassessment notice were therefore not quashed, and the classification dispute was left for determination in the reassessment proceedings. en-us Wed, 15 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 May 2017 12:55:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192374 Prima facie sanction under section 29(7) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 was treated as sufficient to authorise reassessment where the Commissioner recorded satisfaction that the disputed tractor hood item may have been wrongly classified. The HC declined to test the correctness of that classification at the writ stage because the proviso dispenses with a pre-decisional hearing and the merits are to be examined by the assessing authority in reassessment. The sanction and reassessment notice were therefore not quashed, and the classification dispute was left for determination in the reassessment proceedings. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 15 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192374