https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395766 The High Court allowed the State's appeal, overturning the Single Judge's decision. It held that the 2014 amendment to Section 8(f) of the KVAT Act was not clarificatory and could not be applied retrospectively. The assessee's compounded tax liability for the years 2011-12 and 2012-13 included the tax paid for the closed branch in the previous year, and the assessment orders were within the limitation period under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. en-us Fri, 05 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jun 2020 10:54:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395766 The High Court allowed the State's appeal, overturning the Single Judge's decision. It held that the 2014 amendment to Section 8(f) of the KVAT Act was not clarificatory and could not be applied retrospectively. The assessee's compounded tax liability for the years 2011-12 and 2012-13 included the tax paid for the closed branch in the previous year, and the assessment orders were within the limitation period under Section 25(1) of the KVAT Act. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 05 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395766