Furnished inspection materials are required before stock-based assessment stands; separable suppression issues go to statutory appeal.

Where a revised assessment depends on inspection-based stock materials not furnished to the assessee, that stock reconciliation component cannot stand without disclosure of the inspection stock statement and stock reconciliation statement, and it was remitted for fresh determination after supplying those records. The separate suppression component was treated as a matter for the statutory appellate remedy, with limitation, pre-deposit, condonation of delay and exclusion of time to be considered by the appellate authority in accordance with law. The result was partial relief: one part of the assessment was sent back for reconsideration, while the other was left to the appeal process.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the assessment relating to stock reconciliation required remand for supply of the inspection stock statement and the stock reconciliation statement; (ii) whether the assessee should pursue the suppression component by way of statutory appeal and the appellate remedy should govern delay and pre-deposit.

Issue (i): Whether the assessment relating to stock reconciliation required remand for supply of the inspection stock statement and the stock reconciliation statement.

Analysis: The impugned order was made under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, which was treated as in pari materia with Section 21 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The assessment had earlier been remitted for fresh consideration, and the stock-related component in the revised assessment depended on materials that had not been furnished to the assessee. Since the stock statement taken at the time of inspection and the stock reconciliation statement were not among the records supplied, that part of the assessment could not stand without those materials being made available and reconsidered.

Conclusion: The stock reconciliation component was remitted back to the respondent for furnishing the relevant statements and for fresh determination of that part of the assessment alone, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the assessee should pursue the suppression component by way of statutory appeal and the appellate remedy should govern delay and pre-deposit.

Analysis: For the suppression component, the assessee accepted the availability of an appeal under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The Court noted that the appellate remedy would carry its own statutory requirements, including pre-deposit and limitation, and that the assessee could also seek condonation of delay and exclusion of time under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. Those matters were left to the appellate authority to decide on their own merits and in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The suppression component was left to be pursued before the statutory appellate authority, with the accompanying issues of delay and exclusion of time to be decided there, in favour of the assessee to that limited extent.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition resulted in a partial relief: one component of the assessment was sent back for reconsideration, while the other was directed to be pursued through the statutory appellate route.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a revised assessment rests on undisclosed inspection materials, the affected component must be reconsidered after furnishing those materials, while separable issues may be relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.

---