https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348549 Refund disallowance under the wastage and capital goods heads was held unsustainable where no reasons were given for the partial rejection and no notice or hearing was afforded. The use of a uniform 2% wastage rate was found impermissible because wastage or invisible loss must be assessed on the facts of each manufacturing process, not by blanket percentage. The rectification applications under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 could not be rejected merely for want of a reason to reopen, as the original orders themselves disclosed an error apparent on the record. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration after notice, objections and personal hearing. en-us Wed, 06 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Sep 2017 07:18:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348549 Refund disallowance under the wastage and capital goods heads was held unsustainable where no reasons were given for the partial rejection and no notice or hearing was afforded. The use of a uniform 2% wastage rate was found impermissible because wastage or invisible loss must be assessed on the facts of each manufacturing process, not by blanket percentage. The rectification applications under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 could not be rejected merely for want of a reason to reopen, as the original orders themselves disclosed an error apparent on the record. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration after notice, objections and personal hearing. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 06 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348549