<?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>2019 (9) TMI 11 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385243</link>
    <description>Revised assessment orders imposing penalty under Section 27(4) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 were unsustainable because the record did not show a reasonable opportunity to show cause before penalty was levied. The proviso to Section 27(4) required such an opportunity, and the absence of notice and personal hearing vitiated the penalty orders. The Madras HC therefore set aside the revised assessment orders and directed reconsideration after personal hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2019 13:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=585648" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 11 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385243</link>
      <description>Revised assessment orders imposing penalty under Section 27(4) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 were unsustainable because the record did not show a reasonable opportunity to show cause before penalty was levied. The proviso to Section 27(4) required such an opportunity, and the absence of notice and personal hearing vitiated the penalty orders. The Madras HC therefore set aside the revised assessment orders and directed reconsideration after personal hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385243</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>