<?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>2013 (3) TMI 831 - KERALA HIGH COURT  </title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283812</link>
    <description>A reassessment completed without granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing was treated as vitiated and set aside, and delay and laches did not justify rejection where earlier proceedings were under interim stay and fairness in the reassessment process was lacking. Disputed contractual damages could not be recovered through revenue recovery proceedings unless the liability had first been independently adjudicated and ascertained; a party cannot determine its own claim of breach. The royalty demand connected with granite quarrying was not finally decided, but recovery was kept in abeyance pending consideration of a fresh representation for waiver.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Oct 2019 16:27:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=590681" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (3) TMI 831 - KERALA HIGH COURT  </title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283812</link>
      <description>A reassessment completed without granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing was treated as vitiated and set aside, and delay and laches did not justify rejection where earlier proceedings were under interim stay and fairness in the reassessment process was lacking. Disputed contractual damages could not be recovered through revenue recovery proceedings unless the liability had first been independently adjudicated and ascertained; a party cannot determine its own claim of breach. The royalty demand connected with granite quarrying was not finally decided, but recovery was kept in abeyance pending consideration of a fresh representation for waiver.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283812</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>