<?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>GVAT Amnesty Scheme: Second Respondent Erred by Commenting on Petitioners&#039; Eligibility During Best Judgment Assessment.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=51108</link>
    <description>Amnesty Scheme under GVAT - prima facie it appears that the case of the petitioners is not a search case. In any event, even otherwise, while making a best judgment assessment under the GVAT Act, it was not permissible for the second respondent to comment on the eligibility or otherwise of the petitioners under the amnesty scheme.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:58:39 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:58:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=599713" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>GVAT Amnesty Scheme: Second Respondent Erred by Commenting on Petitioners&#039; Eligibility During Best Judgment Assessment.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=51108</link>
      <description>Amnesty Scheme under GVAT - prima facie it appears that the case of the petitioners is not a search case. In any event, even otherwise, while making a best judgment assessment under the GVAT Act, it was not permissible for the second respondent to comment on the eligibility or otherwise of the petitioners under the amnesty scheme.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:58:39 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=51108</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>