https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274810 Under Section 94 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the authority issuing a clarification could not withdraw its own earlier clarification in the absence of an express statutory power of review. The statute vested cancellation or modification of a clarification in the Commissioner under Section 94(7), while Section 94(8) allowed an earlier clarification to be treated as void ab initio only on proof of fraud or misrepresentation of facts. Because those statutory conditions were not invoked, the unilateral withdrawal was without authority and was quashed to that extent. en-us Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Sep 2018 06:47:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274810 Under Section 94 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the authority issuing a clarification could not withdraw its own earlier clarification in the absence of an express statutory power of review. The statute vested cancellation or modification of a clarification in the Commissioner under Section 94(7), while Section 94(8) allowed an earlier clarification to be treated as void ab initio only on proof of fraud or misrepresentation of facts. Because those statutory conditions were not invoked, the unilateral withdrawal was without authority and was quashed to that extent. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 22 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274810