Statutory limitation for reassessment cannot be cured by later extension orders where initiation was already time-barred.

Limitation under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act governs the initiation of reassessment proceedings, so action commenced after the statutory period is time-barred and cannot be sustained. Orders issued under Section 25B extending limitation do not cure a defect where the original initiation was already beyond time; they cannot validate assessments that were void for breach of the statutory bar. The Court therefore treated the reassessment proceedings and the extension orders as ineffective against the expired limitation period, and the impugned assessment orders were set aside.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 were barred by limitation; (ii) whether the orders extending limitation under Section 25B of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 could sustain the assessments.

Issue (i): whether the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 were barred by limitation.

Analysis: The limitation prescribed under Section 25(1) governs the initiation of proceedings, that is, the stage at which the authority proceeds to determine the liability. Since the proceedings in the cases were initiated beyond the statutory period, the assessments could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The proceedings under Section 25(1) were barred by limitation.

Issue (ii): whether the orders extending limitation under Section 25B of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 could sustain the assessments.

Analysis: The contention that substitution of the provision extended the limitation period was rejected in the binding precedents relied on by the Court. The extension orders under Section 25B could not cure the time-bar affecting the initiation of the assessment proceedings.

Conclusion: The orders under Section 25B could not validate the time-barred assessments.

Final Conclusion: The impugned assessment orders and the limitation-extension orders were set aside and the writ petitions were allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory limitation governs the initiation of proceedings, assessment action commenced beyond that period is void and cannot be saved by an order extending limitation that does not override the expired statutory bar.

---