2024 (6) TMI 293 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Maintainability of revision petitions - rejection of revision petition filed by the petitioner on the ground of being filed barred by limitation - HELD THAT - Admittedly, the Writ Petitioner has filed Revision Petitions in time i.e., within 30 days, as mentioned in the order passed in the aforesaid Writ Petitions and even the petitioner has not been heard before the impugned orders are passed and therefore the same is in violation of principles of natural justice and hence, the order rejecting the revision petitions on the ground of limitation is per se illegal and liable to be set aside. The impugned orders are set aside - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to orders dated 12.04.2023 made in Rc.Nos.952/2023/B7 and Rc.No.951/2023/B7 for assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively, regarding rejection of revision petitions under Section 54 of the TNGST Act, 2006 as barred by limitation.

The High Court of Madras, in a common order, addressed the challenge posed by two Writ Petitions against orders dated 12.04.2023 in Rc.Nos.952/2023/B7 and Rc.No.951/2023/B7 for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively. The Court noted that despite granting liberty to file revision petitions under Section 54 of the TNGST Act, 2006 within 30 days, the impugned orders rejected the revision petitions as time-barred. The Court observed that the petitioner had indeed filed the revision petitions within the stipulated time frame, as directed in a previous order, and had not been heard before the impugned orders were passed. Consequently, the Court held that the rejection of the revision petitions on the ground of limitation violated principles of natural justice and was deemed illegal. Therefore, the impugned orders were set aside, directing the Respondents to schedule an enquiry in the Revision Petitions and issue orders on merits within eight weeks from the date of the Court's order. As a result, the Writ Petitions were allowed with no costs incurred.