https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400524 Under the Tamil Nadu VAT regime, the limitation objection failed because reassessment proceedings were initiated within time; the interpretation of "determination" in Section 27 and the deemed assessment scheme under Section 22(2) meant timely commencement of proceedings was sufficient. On the sales-return issue, the assessment could not stand because the officer did not properly reconcile the invoices, credit notes and other materials with Rule 10(6)(b)(i)(B) requirements, and proceeded on an assumption of non-production. The merits challenge succeeded, the assessment was set aside, and the matter was remitted for de novo consideration of the disputed sales-return claim. en-us Mon, 02 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Mar 2022 14:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400524 Under the Tamil Nadu VAT regime, the limitation objection failed because reassessment proceedings were initiated within time; the interpretation of "determination" in Section 27 and the deemed assessment scheme under Section 22(2) meant timely commencement of proceedings was sufficient. On the sales-return issue, the assessment could not stand because the officer did not properly reconcile the invoices, credit notes and other materials with Rule 10(6)(b)(i)(B) requirements, and proceeded on an assumption of non-production. The merits challenge succeeded, the assessment was set aside, and the matter was remitted for de novo consideration of the disputed sales-return claim. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 02 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400524