– “Written laws are formulas in which we endeavour to express as concisely as possible that which, under such or such determined circumstances, natural justice demands”. – Victor Cousin
The Madras High Court ruled that the principles of natural justice not to be adhered to when there is no enhancement of assessment or penalty for orders passed under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.
These writ petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders both passed under section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 rejecting the petitioner’s application in respect of the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14.
The petitioner, K.Subramani, had sought for rectification of the assessment orders in respect of the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013- 14 which has been rejected under the impugned orders. The petitioner has challenged the impugned orders on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice as according to him, the reply send by him has not been considered by the respondent in the impugned orders.
While dealing with a similar issue, the Madras Court by its order in the case of Sri Ragava Medical and General Stores vs, The Deputy Sales Tax Officer, Thirukovilur and another, after extracting section 84 of the Act, 2006 which deals with the rectification application held that “Rectification application under Section 84 of the Act cannot be treated on par with a regular assessment. Only in cases, where there is an error which is apparent on the face of the record in the Assessment Order, a rectification under Section 84 of the Act is permissible. If the opportunity of hearing for the Dealer is made mandatory in an application filed under Section 84 of the Act, there will be no finality of any Assessment.”
The Bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose noted that “In the case on hand also, in the impugned orders passed under section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, there is no enhancement of assessment or penalty and therefore, there is no necessity for the respondent to adhere to the principles of natural justice as claimed by the petitioner in these writ petitions.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
