<?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>2017 (8) TMI 971 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346913</link>
    <description>A reassessment was set aside because the assessee had later produced tax-paid certificates and the assessing authority had not put the assessee on notice that the transactions would remain taxable even if those certificates were furnished. The Madras HC held that the authority could not ignore the material representation, especially when a departmental circular required acceptance of declarations and reconsideration of assessments under the statutory revisional power. The counter affidavit&#039;s claim that the certificates were irrelevant was rejected because the notice did not disclose that basis. The matter was remanded for fresh hearing and consideration of the certificates in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:01:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=486788" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 971 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346913</link>
      <description>A reassessment was set aside because the assessee had later produced tax-paid certificates and the assessing authority had not put the assessee on notice that the transactions would remain taxable even if those certificates were furnished. The Madras HC held that the authority could not ignore the material representation, especially when a departmental circular required acceptance of declarations and reconsideration of assessments under the statutory revisional power. The counter affidavit&#039;s claim that the certificates were irrelevant was rejected because the notice did not disclose that basis. The matter was remanded for fresh hearing and consideration of the certificates in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346913</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>