Rectification limitation does not bar remand for fresh consideration where the original order was timely but procedurally flawed.

The limitation period for rectification under section 37 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 binds the authority making the original rectification order, but it does not prevent an appellate or revisional authority from remanding an unlawful order for fresh consideration where the original order was passed within time. A remand after expiry of the rectification period is not treated as an impermissible extension of limitation when the earlier order is vitiated by breach of natural justice or defective procedure, including ineffective service of notice. The remand was therefore valid, the limitation point failed, and the rectification proceedings were sustained.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the revisional authority could set aside the rectification order and remand the matter for a fresh order after the period prescribed for rectification had expired; (ii) whether such remand amounted to extending the statutory limitation under section 37 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993.

Issue (i): Whether the revisional authority could set aside the rectification order and remand the matter for a fresh order after the period prescribed for rectification had expired.

Analysis: Section 37(1) permits rectification within three years from the end of the financial year in which the assessment or order was made, and subsection (2) authorises the appellate or revisional authority to direct amendment where change becomes necessary as a result of appeal or revision. The original rectification was found to be contrary to the proviso to section 37(1) and to the principles of natural justice because notice was not effectively served before the order was made. The Court held that where the original order was passed within limitation, the time consumed in appeal or revision does not destroy the power of the superior authority to remit the matter for fresh consideration by the assessing authority.

Conclusion: The revisional authority could validly remand the matter for a fresh order.

Issue (ii): Whether such remand amounted to extending the statutory limitation under section 37 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993.

Analysis: The limitation in section 37 governs the authority making the original rectification order. It does not curtail the appellate or revisional power to correct an order found unlawful and direct a fresh decision. The Court followed the principle that a direction issued in appeal, revision, or writ proceedings does not amount to an impermissible extension of the original limitation period where the first order itself was made within time.

Conclusion: The remand did not extend the statutory limitation and was not illegal.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the remand order failed, and the orders sustaining the rectification proceedings were upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: The statutory limitation for rectification binds the original assessing authority, but it does not prevent an appellate or revisional authority from remanding the matter for a fresh order where the original order was made within time and is found to be vitiated by breach of natural justice or statutory procedure.

---