https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441551 Rectification under section 24 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 is limited to mistakes apparent on the face of the record; it cannot be used to re-examine turnover, dispute the nature of transactions, or enhance tax liability, so an order doing so is beyond jurisdiction. The article also notes that insisting on Form F was unsustainable where the assessee had produced communication from the Tamil Nadu authority stating that Form F was not required or would not be issued, and the competent legal position does not permit prejudice merely because the transferee State declines to issue the form. The impugned rectification order was therefore set aside. en-us Mon, 17 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Aug 2023 08:14:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441551 Rectification under section 24 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 is limited to mistakes apparent on the face of the record; it cannot be used to re-examine turnover, dispute the nature of transactions, or enhance tax liability, so an order doing so is beyond jurisdiction. The article also notes that insisting on Form F was unsustainable where the assessee had produced communication from the Tamil Nadu authority stating that Form F was not required or would not be issued, and the competent legal position does not permit prejudice merely because the transferee State declines to issue the form. The impugned rectification order was therefore set aside. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 17 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441551