<?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>2016 (7) TMI 1428 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200081</link>
    <description>Service of an assessment notice on an employee of a private limited company was treated as valid under the statutory scheme, because notice may be served on the dealer or on persons connected with the dealer&#039;s business. The company could not avoid assessment on the ground that the notice was not personally tendered to its signatory, as that would make the prescribed mode of service unworkable for companies. Although the service challenge failed, the court permitted a conditional appellate remedy by allowing appeals to be filed on payment of 50% of the disputed tax, with the appellate authority to decide the matters on merits and limitation kept out of consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2018 07:51:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=513682" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 1428 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200081</link>
      <description>Service of an assessment notice on an employee of a private limited company was treated as valid under the statutory scheme, because notice may be served on the dealer or on persons connected with the dealer&#039;s business. The company could not avoid assessment on the ground that the notice was not personally tendered to its signatory, as that would make the prescribed mode of service unworkable for companies. Although the service challenge failed, the court permitted a conditional appellate remedy by allowing appeals to be filed on payment of 50% of the disputed tax, with the appellate authority to decide the matters on merits and limitation kept out of consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200081</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>