Limitation plea in tax revision must be pursued through statutory remedy when not raised in objections

Writ interference was declined where the assessee challenged a revisional assessment order mainly on limitation but had not raised that plea in the objections to the revision notice. The Court held that the limitation objection could be pursued under the statutory remedy instead of being examined in writ jurisdiction, and preserved the assessee's right to have that plea considered on merits. The respondent was directed to afford a personal hearing and pass a speaking order while examining the limitation issue under the applicable statutory remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned assessment order should be interfered with in writ jurisdiction, or the petitioner should be relegated to raise the plea of limitation under the statutory remedy.

Analysis: The petitioner challenged the second revisional order mainly on the ground of limitation. Although the plea of limitation was stated to be a legal plea that could be examined at any stage, the petitioner had not raised it in the objections submitted to the revision notice. In these circumstances, the Court declined to set aside the assessment order in the writ petition. At the same time, the Court preserved the petitioner's right to invoke the statutory remedy and required the respondent to examine the limitation plea on merits, after granting an opportunity of personal hearing and passing a speaking order.

Conclusion: The writ court did not interfere with the impugned assessment order and the petitioner was left to pursue the remedy under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.

---