<?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>2017 (1) TMI 1561 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200136</link>
    <description>Proceedings for revision under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act were held not to be time-barred because the statutory notice was issued within the prescribed period. However, where reassessment or revision is based on audit objections, fair procedure requires that the assessee be informed of the objections and the material prompting adverse action, even if the statute does not expressly require supply. The audit objection functions only as a cautionary input and cannot bind the assessing authority, but non-supply before revision violates natural justice. The limitation challenge failed, while the audit-based revision was set aside to that extent with fresh notice and hearing directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:19:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=514028" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 1561 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200136</link>
      <description>Proceedings for revision under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act were held not to be time-barred because the statutory notice was issued within the prescribed period. However, where reassessment or revision is based on audit objections, fair procedure requires that the assessee be informed of the objections and the material prompting adverse action, even if the statute does not expressly require supply. The audit objection functions only as a cautionary input and cannot bind the assessing authority, but non-supply before revision violates natural justice. The limitation challenge failed, while the audit-based revision was set aside to that extent with fresh notice and hearing directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200136</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>