<?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>2021 (4) TMI 599 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406483</link>
    <description>An assessee may waive a statutory assessment benefit where no fundamental right is involved, and the assessing authority may rely on the assessee&#039;s own written acceptance. Here, the assessee had accepted application of the invisible loss ratio at 5%, so the assessment order did not disclose any error apparent on the face of the record. Because rectification jurisdiction is confined to patent errors, the rectification authority was not justified in reopening the assessment, and the rejection of rectification was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2021 08:06:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=641876" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (4) TMI 599 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406483</link>
      <description>An assessee may waive a statutory assessment benefit where no fundamental right is involved, and the assessing authority may rely on the assessee&#039;s own written acceptance. Here, the assessee had accepted application of the invisible loss ratio at 5%, so the assessment order did not disclose any error apparent on the face of the record. Because rectification jurisdiction is confined to patent errors, the rectification authority was not justified in reopening the assessment, and the rejection of rectification was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406483</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>