Assessment opportunity and rectification under Tamil Nadu VAT law: hearing failure bars challenge, but apparent errors may still be corrected.

An assessment will not be interfered with on the ground of lack of opportunity where notice was issued, time was extended, hearing was granted, and the assessee still failed to file objections or supporting documents. At the same time, rectification under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 may be invoked for errors apparent on the face of the record, including defects in the treatment of specified items where relevant material was allegedly overlooked. Interim protection may be confined to recovery arising from those identified defects pending disposal of the rectification petition.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the assessment orders were liable to be interfered with on the ground of lack of sufficient opportunity. (ii) Whether the petitioner could be permitted to invoke rectification under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 in respect of the specified defects and obtain protection against recovery pending such petition.

Issue (i): Whether the assessment orders were liable to be interfered with on the ground of lack of sufficient opportunity.

Analysis: The petitioner was given notice, sought time, and was granted hearing. Time to file objections and documents was also extended, but no reply or additional material was filed within the time allowed. The impugned assessment orders were passed only after the petitioner failed to avail the opportunity granted.

Conclusion: The challenge based on want of adequate opportunity was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner could be permitted to invoke rectification under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 in respect of the specified defects and obtain protection against recovery pending such petition.

Analysis: The record indicated a prima facie error in the treatment of defects Nos. 1 and 10, since relevant documents were stated to have been furnished for part of the assessment period and the assessment appeared to overlook that material. In those circumstances, leave was granted to move a rectification petition for the defects pointing to errors apparent on the face of the record. The Court also confined interim protection to recovery arising from defects Nos. 1 and 10, while leaving other matters open to be tested in the rectification proceedings if they were shown to fall within the scope of Section 84.

Conclusion: The petitioner was permitted to file a rectification petition, and recovery of tax relating to defects Nos. 1 and 10 was stayed pending its disposal.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions were not allowed on the challenge to the assessments as a whole, but limited relief was granted by permitting rectification proceedings and protecting the petitioner against recovery on the specified defects in the meantime.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee has been afforded notice and opportunity but fails to file objections or documents, the assessment will not be interfered with on the ground of denial of hearing; however, a rectification mechanism may still be invoked for errors apparent on the face of the record, with appropriate interim protection confined to the impugned items.

---