https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289778 In a deemed assessment under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005, an audit objection by the Accountant General did not by itself confer jurisdiction to reopen proceedings under section 33. The Court stated that reopening had to rest on the statutory basis created by the Act, and an external objection could not substitute for that requirement. It also held that the Assessing Officer had to record independent satisfaction before proceeding; a mechanical response to the audit objection was insufficient. As the reopening, assessment order, and consequential demand notice lacked jurisdiction and independent application of mind, they were quashed and the writ petition was allowed. en-us Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Aug 2020 09:57:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289778 In a deemed assessment under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005, an audit objection by the Accountant General did not by itself confer jurisdiction to reopen proceedings under section 33. The Court stated that reopening had to rest on the statutory basis created by the Act, and an external objection could not substitute for that requirement. It also held that the Assessing Officer had to record independent satisfaction before proceeding; a mechanical response to the audit objection was insufficient. As the reopening, assessment order, and consequential demand notice lacked jurisdiction and independent application of mind, they were quashed and the writ petition was allowed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Sat, 17 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289778