https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435641 Service of a VAT N-2 notice for scrutiny assessment was upheld where the assessee's accountant stated on the record that the notice had been served through the company's gatekeeper. The later affidavit retracting that statement was rejected, especially as it was filed on the day the Tribunal decided the matter. The gatekeeper was treated as a person regularly employed in connection with the business, so service fell within Rule 79 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Rules, 2003. On those facts, the assessee failed to show any infirmity in the assessment proceedings or any substantial question of law, and the challenge was dismissed. en-us Fri, 17 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Mar 2023 09:38:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435641 Service of a VAT N-2 notice for scrutiny assessment was upheld where the assessee's accountant stated on the record that the notice had been served through the company's gatekeeper. The later affidavit retracting that statement was rejected, especially as it was filed on the day the Tribunal decided the matter. The gatekeeper was treated as a person regularly employed in connection with the business, so service fell within Rule 79 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Rules, 2003. On those facts, the assessee failed to show any infirmity in the assessment proceedings or any substantial question of law, and the challenge was dismissed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 17 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435641