<?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 1021 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346963</link>
    <description>Where a revised revision notice supersedes an earlier notice, the assessing authority must decide the matter on the basis of that revised notice and the objections filed in response. The authority in this matter received the dealer&#039;s reply but did not consider it before completing reassessment, and the notice incorrectly suggested that a personal hearing would occur within the objection period. That failure to consider the reply and to grant a meaningful hearing, especially when sought, breached natural justice. The reassessment order was therefore set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the dealer and taking account of the reply and legal submissions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=486894" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1021 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346963</link>
      <description>Where a revised revision notice supersedes an earlier notice, the assessing authority must decide the matter on the basis of that revised notice and the objections filed in response. The authority in this matter received the dealer&#039;s reply but did not consider it before completing reassessment, and the notice incorrectly suggested that a personal hearing would occur within the objection period. That failure to consider the reply and to grant a meaningful hearing, especially when sought, breached natural justice. The reassessment order was therefore set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the dealer and taking account of the reply and legal submissions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346963</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>