<?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>2018 (1) TMI 404 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353668</link>
    <description>Filing a return claiming composition tax and remitting tax at the prescribed rate was treated as a valid exercise of the option under Section 7-C because neither the Act nor the Rules required any separate declaration or special form. The article also states that reassessment based on scrutiny or revision had to comply strictly with the prescribed random-selection procedure under Rule 15(5-B); absent such compliance, reopening was not sustainable. Section 16-AA was described as applicable only to escaped turnover cases where Section 7-C permission had been granted, and not where the department proceeded on the mistaken footing that no Section 7-C option had been exercised.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:11:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=503773" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 404 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353668</link>
      <description>Filing a return claiming composition tax and remitting tax at the prescribed rate was treated as a valid exercise of the option under Section 7-C because neither the Act nor the Rules required any separate declaration or special form. The article also states that reassessment based on scrutiny or revision had to comply strictly with the prescribed random-selection procedure under Rule 15(5-B); absent such compliance, reopening was not sustainable. Section 16-AA was described as applicable only to escaped turnover cases where Section 7-C permission had been granted, and not where the department proceeded on the mistaken footing that no Section 7-C option had been exercised.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353668</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>