https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311999 The HC set aside the penalty orders issued by the 3rd respondent under Section 67(1) of the KVAT Act, citing improper procedure in resolving a classification dispute during penalty proceedings. The case was remanded for reconsideration, aligning with the precedent set in 2014 (3) KHC 55. The HC mandated a fresh hearing, granting the petitioner an opportunity to present their case. The 3rd respondent was directed to finalize the proceedings within two months from receiving the judgment copy, with the petitioner responsible for providing the necessary documents. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly. en-us Fri, 19 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Jan 2024 08:33:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311999 The HC set aside the penalty orders issued by the 3rd respondent under Section 67(1) of the KVAT Act, citing improper procedure in resolving a classification dispute during penalty proceedings. The case was remanded for reconsideration, aligning with the precedent set in 2014 (3) KHC 55. The HC mandated a fresh hearing, granting the petitioner an opportunity to present their case. The 3rd respondent was directed to finalize the proceedings within two months from receiving the judgment copy, with the petitioner responsible for providing the necessary documents. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 19 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311999