https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425560 The Kerala HC article explains that a challenge to an order under Section 35 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 failed where the dealer had already been given a fresh opportunity pursuant to the Supreme Court's direction and had filed a reply that was considered before the impugned order. Objections based on prior service by affixture and limitation were rejected because no infirmity in the fresh decision or its calculations was shown. It also notes that suo motu revisional power and the remand for fresh assessment were sustained, as the original assessments had been made without the relevant penalty proceedings and the dealer had been heard before remand. en-us Thu, 14 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Jul 2022 08:39:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425560 The Kerala HC article explains that a challenge to an order under Section 35 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 failed where the dealer had already been given a fresh opportunity pursuant to the Supreme Court's direction and had filed a reply that was considered before the impugned order. Objections based on prior service by affixture and limitation were rejected because no infirmity in the fresh decision or its calculations was shown. It also notes that suo motu revisional power and the remand for fresh assessment were sustained, as the original assessments had been made without the relevant penalty proceedings and the dealer had been heard before remand. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 14 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425560