Judicial review of rectification refusal upheld where the challenge showed a serious defect in the decision-making process.

An order rejecting a rectification application under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act was interfered with because the challenge disclosed a serious defect in the decision-making process. The assessee contended that the pre-assessment notice did not disclose the grounds later relied on and that land cost, corpus fund, electrical charges and water charges had been included in turnover computation. On the materials placed, the Court found the rectification plea required reconsideration, set aside the rejection, and remitted the application to the assessing authority for fresh consideration after hearing the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the assessee's rectification application under section 66 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, called for interference in judicial review.

Analysis: The assessment order was challenged on the ground that the pre-assessment notice did not disclose the grounds ultimately relied on, and that items such as land cost, corpus fund, electrical and water charges had been taken into account in the turnover computation. On the materials placed, the Court found that the rectification plea raised a serious issue requiring reconsideration. The Court treated the challenge as one going to the decision-making process and found sufficient grounds to interfere with the order rejecting rectification.

Conclusion: The rejection of the rectification application was set aside and the application was remitted to the assessing authority for fresh consideration after hearing the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The assessee obtained relief by way of remand for fresh decision on the rectification request, while the merits of the assessment were left open for consideration by the assessing authority.

Ratio Decidendi: An order refusing rectification can be interfered with in judicial review where the challenge discloses a serious defect in the decision-making process and requires fresh consideration by the assessing authority.

---