Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an audit assessment completed after expiry of the six-month period under Section 42(6) of the Odisha Value Added Tax Act, 2004 could be validated by a subsequent extension granted by the Commissioner.
Analysis: Section 42(6) required completion of audit assessment within six months from receipt of the Audit Visit Report, and the proviso empowered the Commissioner to grant further time only on the merits of the case and only within the statutory outer limit. The assessing authority passed the assessment order after the six-month period had expired and before the Commissioner's order granting extension. The later extension was therefore ex post facto. Such a time-barred order could not be revived by a subsequent administrative extension, particularly when the statutory discretion under the proviso required prior and meaningful application of mind to the merits of the case. Section 42(7) reinforced the time-bound nature of the scheme.
Conclusion: The assessment order was invalid as time-barred, and the subsequent extension could not validate it.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute prescribes a mandatory period for completion of assessment and permits extension only within the statutory framework, a limitation period that has already expired cannot be revived by a later ex post facto extension.