<?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>2022 (5) TMI 554 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422294</link>
    <description>A limitation objection to a reassessment notice, where it was said to be time-barred and void, could be examined in writ proceedings because it went to the jurisdiction and authority of the assessing officer. The assessee had raised the objection before the assessing authority, but it was not dealt with in the assessment order. The Single Judge accepted that objection, and the Division Bench was expected to address that finding on merits rather than decline interference only on the ground that the statutory appellate remedy should have been pursued. The view that the writ court should not have examined the limitation issue was therefore not accepted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2022 11:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=678936" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 554 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422294</link>
      <description>A limitation objection to a reassessment notice, where it was said to be time-barred and void, could be examined in writ proceedings because it went to the jurisdiction and authority of the assessing officer. The assessee had raised the objection before the assessing authority, but it was not dealt with in the assessment order. The Single Judge accepted that objection, and the Division Bench was expected to address that finding on merits rather than decline interference only on the ground that the statutory appellate remedy should have been pursued. The view that the writ court should not have examined the limitation issue was therefore not accepted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>