Statutory notice service must be conclusively proved before a revisional order can stand under Tamil Nadu VAT procedure.

Conclusive proof of service is required where a revisional order depends on pre-revisional notices under Rule 19(1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007. The court noted that the record did not contain the prescribed endorsement by the person delivering the notice, and the alleged acknowledgment was insufficient to establish valid service. As a result, the statutory requirement of a reasonable opportunity to show cause under the proviso to Section 27(1) and Section 27(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was not met, and the revisional orders were set aside for fresh consideration after notice and response.

---

---

Issues: Whether the pre-revisional notices were duly served in accordance with Rule 19(1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007, and whether the impugned revisional orders could be sustained in the absence of conclusive proof of such service.

Analysis: The challenged orders proceeded on the footing that the pre-revisional notices had been served. The service mechanism invoked was Rule 19(1)(a), under which tendering of notice is required and the endorsement of the person delivering the notice operates as proof. The records placed before the Court did not contain the necessary endorsement, and the alleged acknowledgment was not found sufficient to conclusively establish service. In the absence of conclusive proof of service, the statutory requirement under the proviso to Section 27(1) and Section 27(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, of giving a reasonable opportunity to show cause was not satisfied.

Conclusion: The impugned revisional orders were unsustainable and were set aside for want of conclusive proof of service of the pre-revisional notices. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration after affording the dealer an opportunity to respond.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions succeeded to the extent of setting aside the revisional orders and directing reconsideration after notice and response, without any adjudication on the merits of the tax dispute.

Ratio Decidendi: Where service of a statutory notice is relied on as the basis for a revisional order, conclusive proof of service must be established in the manner prescribed by the governing service rule, and failure to do so vitiates the order for breach of the mandatory opportunity to show cause.

---