9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1168X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the face of the record. The scope of powers under Section 55 of the TNGST Act is not to review an order passed by it and the requirement being that the error should be apparent on the face of the record to be rectified. The writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are set aside and the matters are remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration - petition allowed by way of remand. - W.P.Nos.28475 to 28478 of 2005 and W.P.M.P.Nos.31079 to 31082 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 21-8-2017 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. N.Inbarajan For the Respondents : Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai ORDER Heard Mr. N.Inbarajan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned Additional Governmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er requested the respondent to rectify the error by invoking his power under Section 55 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. In the mean time, the writ appeals filed by the petitioner against the interim order granted in the writ petitions came up before the Hon'ble First Bench. The Hon'ble First Bench disposed of the writ appeals and the writ petitions, by judgment dated 11.07.2005, which reads as follows:- Admittedly against the assessment orders under challenge under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and Central Sales Tax,the petitioner has filed a rectification petition under Section 9 (2) of CST Act read with section 55 of the TNGST Act which is pending. These writ petitions are therefore disposed off with a d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... requirement being that the error should be apparent on the face of the record to be rectified. In other words, the mistake should not be as such which can be established only by a long drawn process of reasoning or debatable under law. All that the respondent is required to see that the notification relied upon by the petitioner would be applicable to the petitioner's case. 6. Unfortunately, the respondent, though has accepted verbatim the contention raised in the rectification petition, arbitrarily, in a single line rejected the petition, stating that there is no error apparent on the face of the record and assessment cannot be revised. The manner in which the respondent had disposed of the rectification petition is erroneous and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
