https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368240 Penalty under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act could not be sustained where the proposal notice cited Section 22(5) but the impugned orders imposed penalty under Section 27(3)(c), creating a mismatch between notice and final action. The assessment was also vitiated because the record did not show that a specific date for personal hearing was granted, despite a general reference to an opportunity being available. On these procedural fairness grounds, the revised assessment orders and penalty were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after due personal hearing. en-us Thu, 27 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Oct 2018 07:37:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368240 Penalty under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act could not be sustained where the proposal notice cited Section 22(5) but the impugned orders imposed penalty under Section 27(3)(c), creating a mismatch between notice and final action. The assessment was also vitiated because the record did not show that a specific date for personal hearing was granted, despite a general reference to an opportunity being available. On these procedural fairness grounds, the revised assessment orders and penalty were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after due personal hearing. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 27 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368240