https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352617 The Madras HC noted that an earlier Division Bench had upheld Section 2(11) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, but had also required assessing officers to consider objections filed in response to revision notices and follow due procedure. The impugned assessment orders wrongly treated the issue as concluded and failed to examine the petitioner's objections on merits. As the petitioner had also sought a personal hearing that was not granted, the Court held that the orders breached natural justice. The orders were set aside and the assessing authority was directed to consider the objections, afford a personal hearing, and pass a speaking order in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 07 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Dec 2017 08:48:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352617 The Madras HC noted that an earlier Division Bench had upheld Section 2(11) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, but had also required assessing officers to consider objections filed in response to revision notices and follow due procedure. The impugned assessment orders wrongly treated the issue as concluded and failed to examine the petitioner's objections on merits. As the petitioner had also sought a personal hearing that was not granted, the Court held that the orders breached natural justice. The orders were set aside and the assessing authority was directed to consider the objections, afford a personal hearing, and pass a speaking order in accordance with law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 07 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352617