<?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>2020 (12) TMI 905 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402106</link>
    <description>Reassessment under the TNVAT Act must be based on the assessing authority&#039;s independent appraisal of the material and not on a mechanical adoption of an Enforcement Wing report. Here, the same disputed material was applied across multiple years without fresh examination, so the reassessment was treated as vitiated for non-application of mind. The orders were also held to breach natural justice because the documents relied upon, including purchase details and lorry receipt material, were not furnished before completion, causing prejudice despite the burden of proof provisions. The assessment orders were quashed and remanded for fresh consideration after disclosure of the relied-upon documents and a personal hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2020 10:22:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=631093" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 905 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402106</link>
      <description>Reassessment under the TNVAT Act must be based on the assessing authority&#039;s independent appraisal of the material and not on a mechanical adoption of an Enforcement Wing report. Here, the same disputed material was applied across multiple years without fresh examination, so the reassessment was treated as vitiated for non-application of mind. The orders were also held to breach natural justice because the documents relied upon, including purchase details and lorry receipt material, were not furnished before completion, causing prejudice despite the burden of proof provisions. The assessment orders were quashed and remanded for fresh consideration after disclosure of the relied-upon documents and a personal hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402106</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>