Withdrawn rectification order could not sustain tax demand, and refund was directed while reassessment remedies remained open.

Where the impugned rectification order was withdrawn, the resulting tax demand could not be sustained and the amount found due had to be refunded in accordance with law. The Court directed release of the refund to the petitioner, while preserving the revenue's liberty to initiate reassessment proceedings under Section 17 or revision proceedings under Section 34 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, if permissible in law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rectification order creating tax liability and denying refund could be sustained, and whether the petitioner was entitled to refund of the amount found due, with liberty to the revenue to take proceedings for reassessment or revision.

Analysis: The rectification order was stated to have been withdrawn. The Court accordingly directed release of the refund amount due to the petitioner in accordance with law. It was also made open to the respondents to initiate proceedings under Section 17 for reassessment or under Section 34 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 for revision, in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to refund of the amount due, and the rectification-based demand did not survive; the revenue was left free to proceed under the statutory reassessment or revision remedies.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of by directing refund of the due amount, while preserving the respondents' statutory power to reassess or revise the assessment.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the impugned rectification order is withdrawn, the resulting demand cannot stand, though the revenue's independent statutory remedies for reassessment or revision remain available.

---