https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419412 Writ petitions challenged reassessment-cum-penalty orders issued after the original assessment had already been set aside on revision and remanded for fresh assessment. The petitioners contended that reassessment under the JVAT Act was invalid because it was initiated on a non-existent audit objection, without the Assessing Officer recording independent satisfaction, and without considering forms and supporting documents produced after remand. The HC noted that the dispute involved questions of fact and law and therefore required the petitioners to pursue the statutory alternative remedy of appeal or revision under the JVAT Act. The writ petitions were disposed of with liberty to avail that remedy, if permissible in law. en-us Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Mar 2022 07:59:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419412 Writ petitions challenged reassessment-cum-penalty orders issued after the original assessment had already been set aside on revision and remanded for fresh assessment. The petitioners contended that reassessment under the JVAT Act was invalid because it was initiated on a non-existent audit objection, without the Assessing Officer recording independent satisfaction, and without considering forms and supporting documents produced after remand. The HC noted that the dispute involved questions of fact and law and therefore required the petitioners to pursue the statutory alternative remedy of appeal or revision under the JVAT Act. The writ petitions were disposed of with liberty to avail that remedy, if permissible in law. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419412