<?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 (4) TMI 414 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358303</link>
    <description>Fresh revised notice for reassessment for 2009-10 required the earlier assessment to be set aside and the matter reconsidered afresh after allowing objections to the revised notice. For 2010-11 and 2011-12, the assessments were interfered with because the objections were not meaningfully dealt with and no specific date for personal hearing was fixed as required by the departmental circular. The assessments were therefore remanded for fresh consideration with proper hearing procedure, including a specific personal hearing date where necessary. The ruling emphasises that reassessment must follow the prescribed process for consideration of objections and hearing before finalisation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2018 15:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=516441" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 414 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358303</link>
      <description>Fresh revised notice for reassessment for 2009-10 required the earlier assessment to be set aside and the matter reconsidered afresh after allowing objections to the revised notice. For 2010-11 and 2011-12, the assessments were interfered with because the objections were not meaningfully dealt with and no specific date for personal hearing was fixed as required by the departmental circular. The assessments were therefore remanded for fresh consideration with proper hearing procedure, including a specific personal hearing date where necessary. The ruling emphasises that reassessment must follow the prescribed process for consideration of objections and hearing before finalisation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358303</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>