<?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 (6) TMI 203 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423362</link>
    <description>Mere illegality or procedural error in assessment proceedings does not, by itself, justify adverse personal strictures, findings of mala fides, or lack of good faith against a statutory authority. In this case, service of notice, change of business address, and ex parte assessment actions were disputed under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008, but the Court found that the assessing authority had acted on the registered address and attempted service at the available places. The impugned adverse remarks, strictures, and connected cost directions were therefore not justified and were set aside, with the treatment of costs modified as directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2022 12:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=681142" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (6) TMI 203 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423362</link>
      <description>Mere illegality or procedural error in assessment proceedings does not, by itself, justify adverse personal strictures, findings of mala fides, or lack of good faith against a statutory authority. In this case, service of notice, change of business address, and ex parte assessment actions were disputed under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008, but the Court found that the assessing authority had acted on the registered address and attempted service at the available places. The impugned adverse remarks, strictures, and connected cost directions were therefore not justified and were set aside, with the treatment of costs modified as directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423362</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>