Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2018 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 1267 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxValidity of Revision proceedings - Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 - case of petitioner is that the revision is uncalled for and the assessment was already accepted and all further proceedings were dropped - effective alternative remedy of appeal. Held that:- Section 51 of the TNVAT Act provides an Appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and Section 52 of the TNVAT Act provides an Appeal to the Appellate Joint Commissioner. Further, Section 84 of the TNVAT Act provides Power to rectify any error apparent on the face of the record. Section 84(4) of the TNVAT Act states that the powers under sub-section (1) may be exercised by the assessing authorities even though the original order of assessment, if any, passed in the matter has been the subject-matter of an appeal or revision. Section 84(5) of the TNVAT Act enumerates that the provisions of this Act relating to appeal and revision shall apply to an order of rectification made under this section as they apply to the order in respect of which such order of rectification has been made. The functions of the Appellate Authority under the TNVAT Act is quasi judicial in nature. They are empowered to conduct the proceedings by summoning the persons or calling for the documents or otherwise. Thus, the writ petitioner has to prefer an appeal against the order of revision, which is impugned in these present writ petitions. The very purpose of the appeal provision is to ensure that the orders passed by the original authorities are checked and the aggrieved person must get a remedy even before the Appellate forum. In all circumstances, if such appeal provision is dispensed with, then it will amount to circumventing the provisions of the TNVAT Act and further, this Court is of an opinion that the appeals provided under such statute are to be trusted even by the aggrieved persons. Thus, the writ petition is not only belated, since filed after a lapse of two years from the date of passing of the impugned order, but the appeal provision provided under the statute has not been exhausted by the writ petitioner. Under these circumstances, the present writ petitions cannot be entertained in view of the fact that the petitioner has to exhaust the appeal remedy contemplated under the provisions of the TNVAT Act. Petition dismissed - decided against petitioner.
|