https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790926 Transactions covered under Form F required fresh examination because the earlier revisional view was based on the law as then understood, but the later Supreme Court exposition in Ashok Leyland-II clarified that reopening under the statutory scheme remains possible where an assessment is tainted by fraud, collusion, misrepresentation, suppression of material facts, or false particulars. The controversy also called for consideration of the amendment introducing Section 6(A)(3) and a renewed factual appraisal by the final fact-finding authority. The impugned order was set aside to the extent challenged and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law. en-us Mon, 27 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 May 2026 07:56:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790926 Transactions covered under Form F required fresh examination because the earlier revisional view was based on the law as then understood, but the later Supreme Court exposition in Ashok Leyland-II clarified that reopening under the statutory scheme remains possible where an assessment is tainted by fraud, collusion, misrepresentation, suppression of material facts, or false particulars. The controversy also called for consideration of the amendment introducing Section 6(A)(3) and a renewed factual appraisal by the final fact-finding authority. The impugned order was set aside to the extent challenged and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Mon, 27 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790926