9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner earlier challenging the Recovery Notice and the Assessment order dated 24.06.2016 were to be dismissed on account of latches, it cannot be construed that the application under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 were barred. Even if the Appellate remedy is not available under Section 51 of the TNVAT Act, 2006, the remedy under Section 84 of the Act cannot be denied particularly when the law has been settled in favour of the assessee.
The impugned order dated 11.05.2022 stands quashed and the case stands remitted back to the respondent to pass a fresh order on merits - Petition allowed by way of remand. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,909/- towards the reversal of input tax credit under Section 19(5)(c) of TNVAT Act, 2006. 6. In this background, the petitioner challenged the recovery Notice dated 21.03.2022 in W.P.No.8071 of 2022. W.P.No.8071 of 2022 however came to be withdrawn at the time of its admission on 05.04.2022. Subsequently, the petitioner filed W.P.No.9845 of 2022 to quash the Assessment Order dated 24.06.2016. W.P.No.9845 of 2022 was dismissed by this Court at the time of admission vide its order dated 25.04.2022. Paragraph Nos.5, 6 and 7 of the aforesaid order dated 25.04.2022 read as under:- "5. Assuming that, if there are any grounds under which the order impugned can be challenged before this Court invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction under Artic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . M/s.Everest Industries Limited, rep by its Senior Manager- Finance, Podanur Post, Coimbatore - 641 023. 8. The petitioner also did not file a Statutory Appeal under Section 51 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 before the First Appellate Authority. Instead, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act, 2006 for rectification of order dated 24.06.2016 in the light of the subsequent order of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1260 of 2017 batch etc., vide its order dated 31.03.2022. The application filed by the petitioner under Section 84 of the Act on 05.05.2022 has been rejected by the respondent. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner would draw attention to paragraph Nos.149 and 150 from the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee to revive the litigation by filing a writ petition. It is submitted that clearly the writ petition that was filed subsequently on 25.04.2022 in W.P.No.9845 of 2022 was liable to be dismissed and was accordingly dismissed. Even if an appeal was filed by the petitioner under Section 51 of the TNVAT Act, 2006, it could have been dismissed on account of limitation under Section 51 of the TNVAT Act, 2006. Further, it is submitted that Section 84 of the Act, is available entitled only for rectification of error apparent on the face of record. It is submitted that subsequent decision of the Court would not render the Assessment Order dated 24.06.2016 suffered from the vices of error apparent on the face of record. It is therefore submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further submits that paragraph No.150 of the order of the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Tamilnadu, Rep by its Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, Chennai Vs. M/s.Everest Industries Limited, rep by its Senior Manager-Finance, Podanur Post, Coimbatore - 641 023 as clearly alienated the position of law and that being the case, it is not open for the respondent to reject the application under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act, 2006. 15. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent. 16. The issue that arises for consideration is whether the petitioner was entitled to file a petition under Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
