<?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 (9) TMI 999 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428054</link>
    <description>A completed sales tax assessment cannot be reopened by a notice issued beyond the statutory limitation for escaped turnover. After verification of the accounts and supporting documents, the assessee&#039;s original assessment had been finalised, and the later notice sought to recompute turnover, deny the concessional CST benefit, and raise tax with interest. As the five-year limitation under the Puducherry General Sales Tax Act, 1967 had already expired, the notice could not bypass the statutory bar or substitute for a fresh assessment. The proposed criminal consequences also failed because valid determination of escapement within time was a necessary precondition. The notice was quashed as time-barred and unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2022 08:24:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=691516" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 999 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428054</link>
      <description>A completed sales tax assessment cannot be reopened by a notice issued beyond the statutory limitation for escaped turnover. After verification of the accounts and supporting documents, the assessee&#039;s original assessment had been finalised, and the later notice sought to recompute turnover, deny the concessional CST benefit, and raise tax with interest. As the five-year limitation under the Puducherry General Sales Tax Act, 1967 had already expired, the notice could not bypass the statutory bar or substitute for a fresh assessment. The proposed criminal consequences also failed because valid determination of escapement within time was a necessary precondition. The notice was quashed as time-barred and unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428054</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>