<?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 (8) TMI 925 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426686</link>
    <description>Assessment and rectification orders were set aside for breach of natural justice because the relied-upon investigation material and railway records were not supplied to the taxpayer despite request, and the rectification application was rejected without a personal hearing. The court noted that Section 24(1) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 requires a reasonable opportunity of being heard before rejecting rectification on the ground that no mistake apparent on record exists. As the orders were cryptic and unsupported by disclosed reasons, the defects could not be cured by affidavit. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication by another officer after supply of the material and a personal hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2022 08:46:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=688635" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (8) TMI 925 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426686</link>
      <description>Assessment and rectification orders were set aside for breach of natural justice because the relied-upon investigation material and railway records were not supplied to the taxpayer despite request, and the rectification application was rejected without a personal hearing. The court noted that Section 24(1) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 requires a reasonable opportunity of being heard before rejecting rectification on the ground that no mistake apparent on record exists. As the orders were cryptic and unsupported by disclosed reasons, the defects could not be cured by affidavit. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication by another officer after supply of the material and a personal hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426686</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>