9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atter qua captioned writ petitions arises under the 'the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (Tamil Nadu Act No.32 of 2006)' [hereinafter 'TNVAT Act' for the sake of convenience and clarity]. 5. The case of writ petitioner is that it is a manufacturer of Alumina Porcelain and Composite Insulators; that it is a registered dealer on the file of respondent under TNVAT Act besides being a registered dealer under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956; that there was assessment under TNVAT Act; that the assessment was deemed assessment under Section 22(2) of TNVAT Act; that thereafter proceedings were commenced touching upon reversal of ITC [Input Tax Credit] pertaining to inter-state trade; that writ petitioner earlier approached this Court by way of writ petitions vide W.P.Nos.17243 to 17246 of 2017; that those writ petitions came to be disposed of by a Hon'ble single Judge vide a common order dated 07.07.2017 inter-alia directing the earlier assessment to be treated as 'show cause notice' [hereinafter 'SCN' in singular and 'SCNs' in plural for the sake of convenience and clarity] so that opportunity is given to writ petitioner; that there is no disp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch less rectification within the meaning of Section 84 of TNVAT Act. 10. I now embark upon the exercise of considering the rival submissions, discussing the same and giving my dispositive reasoning. 11. The first point that arises for consideration is whether the point urged would qualify as rectification within the meaning of Section 84 of TNVAT Act. Section 84 of TNVAT Act reads as follows: 'Section 84. Power to rectify any error apparent on the face of the record.- (1) An assessing authority or an appellate or revising authority (including the Appellate Tribunal) may, at any time within five years from the date of any order passed by it, rectify any error apparent on the face of the record: Provided that no such rectification which has the effect of enhancing an assessment or any penalty shall be made unless such authority has given notice to the dealer and has allowed him reasonable opportunity of being heard. (2) Where such rectification has the effect of reducing an assessment or penalty, the assessing authority shall make any refund, which may be due to the dealer. (3) Where any such rectification has the effect of enhancing an assessment or penalty, the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SCC 260, (ii) United Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon and others reported in (2010) 8 SCC 110 and (iii) Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore and another Vs. Mathew K.C. reported in (2018) 3 SCC 85. Relevant paragraph in Dunlop case is paragraph No.3 and relevant portion of the same reads as follows: '3. ....... Article 226 is not meant to short-circuit or circumvent statutory procedures. It is only where statutory remedies are entirely ill-suited to meet the demands of extraordinary situations, as for instance where the very vires of the statute is in question or where private or public wrongs are so inextricably mixed up and the prevention of public injury and the vindication of public justice require it that recourse may be had to Article 226 of the Constitution. But then the Court must have good and sufficient reason to bypass the alternative remedy provided by statute. Surely matters involving the revenue where statutory remedies are available are not such matters. We can also take judicial notice of the fact that the vast majority of the petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution are filed solely for the purpose of obtaining interim orders and thereafter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e High Courts will exercise their discretion in such matters with greater caution, care and circumspection.' (underlining made by this Court to supply emphasis and highlight) 14. I have already taken the above view regarding alternate remedy qua fiscal law by respectfully following Dunlop India, Satyawati Tandon and K.C.Mathew principles of Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 28.06.2019 made in W.P.No.17804 of 2019. This order was carried in appeal by way of a intra-court appeal and a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide judgement dated 10.02.2020 made in W.A.No.196 of 2020 has sustained this view and dismissed the writ appeal. Therefore, I respectfully follow the ratio of Hon'ble Division Bench of this court in this regard. 15. With regard to ITC reversal, a learned single Judge of this Court Hon'ble Mr.Jusice Rajiv Shakdher (as his Lordship then was) has rendered a judgement in Everest Industries Limited Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2017) 100 VST 158. This Court is informed by both sides that there is an appeal by way of intra-court appeal and a Hon'ble Division Bench is now in seizin of the matter. 16. Be that as it may, in the case o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
