https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293307 The High Court upheld the Magistrate's decision, finding the petitioner's failure to challenge the tax classification within the specified time made the assessment final. The defense of not practicing a profession in the city was rejected due to lack of evidence. The Court highlighted the availability of an appeal process, ensuring fairness. The petition was dismissed, affirming the conviction under Sections 125 and 420 of Madras Act III of 1904. en-us Fri, 26 Aug 1910 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Feb 2021 17:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293307 The High Court upheld the Magistrate's decision, finding the petitioner's failure to challenge the tax classification within the specified time made the assessment final. The defense of not practicing a profession in the city was rejected due to lack of evidence. The Court highlighted the availability of an appeal process, ensuring fairness. The petition was dismissed, affirming the conviction under Sections 125 and 420 of Madras Act III of 1904. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 26 Aug 1910 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293307