https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352268 A settlement application under the statutory scheme had to be classified by the dealer under the correct clause at the outset, with the corresponding amount remitted. Where the authority found that the application fell under a different clause, the proper course was to return it for rectification and compliance rather than reject it outright. The rejection was also defective because no prior notice had been given before the earlier rejection, and the authority later maintained the same result without curing that procedural defect. The settlement application was therefore treated as improperly rejected and required reconsideration after affording a personal hearing. en-us Thu, 23 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Dec 2017 08:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352268 A settlement application under the statutory scheme had to be classified by the dealer under the correct clause at the outset, with the corresponding amount remitted. Where the authority found that the application fell under a different clause, the proper course was to return it for rectification and compliance rather than reject it outright. The rejection was also defective because no prior notice had been given before the earlier rejection, and the authority later maintained the same result without curing that procedural defect. The settlement application was therefore treated as improperly rejected and required reconsideration after affording a personal hearing. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 23 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352268