2016 (12) TMI 1021 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Appeal allowed for rectified assessment order modification under Section 55(4)

The court clarified that an appeal against a rectified assessment order is maintainable if the rectification results in a modified order, distinguishing ... Maintainability of appeal - appeal was filed against the rectified order - Held that: - similar issue was decided in the case of Artis Leathers Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT) , The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT) (FAC) [2016 (9) TMI 824 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], where it was held that as against the order of rectification passed resulting in the modification of the original order passed, the assessee has the right of appeal before the appellate forum. Petition allowed in favor of petitioner. Issues:1. Maintainability of appeal against a rectified assessment order.Analysis:The judgment involves the issue of the maintainability of an appeal against a rectified assessment order. The petitioner had filed an appeal against an order rectifying an error in the assessment order. The first respondent, the appellate authority, rejected the appeal as not maintainable, stating that an appeal cannot be entertained against a revised order. The court referred to a previous case where a similar issue was considered and emphasized that the appeal should focus on whether the petitioner has grounds to challenge the rectified assessment order. It was clarified that the order passed under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act merged with the original assessment order, making the appeal maintainable. The court cited precedents to support the view that an appeal can be filed against a modified or rectified order, emphasizing the distinction between rectification resulting in a modified order and a refusal to rectify that leaves the original order intact.2. Interpretation of Section 55(4) of the Act regarding appeal rights.The judgment also delves into the interpretation of Section 55(4) of the Act concerning appeal rights in the context of rectification of assessment orders. It was highlighted that when rectification leads to a modified order, the assessee has the right to appeal. The court cited previous decisions to establish that an order declining to correct errors maintains the original order intact, while rectification resulting in modification allows for an appeal remedy. The judgment emphasized that the assessee can appeal against an order of rectification that modifies the original assessment order, as provided under Section 55(4) of the Act. The court's decision was guided by the interpretation of this section and the precedents cited to support the petitioner's right to appeal in this case.Overall, the judgment clarifies the maintainability of an appeal against a rectified assessment order, emphasizing the rights of the assessee to challenge modified orders under Section 55(4) of the Act. The court's decision allows the petitioner to re-present the appeal petition for further consideration by the appellate authority, setting aside the earlier rejection based on maintainability grounds.