https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429861 Rule 59(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 permitted the territorial Assessing Authority to act on remand orders even if it had not made the original assessment, so the jurisdiction objection failed. The remand direction to the "concerned Assessing Authority" was treated as referring to the original assessing officer, and no prejudice was shown. However, an assessing authority on remand must give effect to binding appellate findings. Where the appellate authority had rejected tax on purchases under the composition scheme, the reassessment could not lawfully repeat the same levy by treating the same pre-declaration purchases as taxable. en-us Thu, 20 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Nov 2022 09:10:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429861 Rule 59(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 permitted the territorial Assessing Authority to act on remand orders even if it had not made the original assessment, so the jurisdiction objection failed. The remand direction to the "concerned Assessing Authority" was treated as referring to the original assessing officer, and no prejudice was shown. However, an assessing authority on remand must give effect to binding appellate findings. Where the appellate authority had rejected tax on purchases under the composition scheme, the reassessment could not lawfully repeat the same levy by treating the same pre-declaration purchases as taxable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 20 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429861