TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether a writ of mandamus could be issued to appoint a Joint Commissioner from the Commercial Taxes Department to examine the legality of assessment orders when the statutory appellate remedy had already been invoked. (ii) Whether the pre-revision notice issued under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was liable to be quashed.
Issue (i): Whether a writ of mandamus could be issued to appoint a Joint Commissioner from the Commercial Taxes Department to examine the legality of assessment orders when the statutory appellate remedy had already been invoked.
Analysis: The assessment dispute had already travelled through the statutory hierarchy and the petitioner had been granted the remedy of appeal under Section 58 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The statutory scheme did not provide for appointment of an arbitrator or a departmental officer to re-examine the assessment outside the appellate mechanism. In these circumstances, a writ direction to constitute such a forum was not warranted.
Conclusion: The request for appointment of a Joint Commissioner to test the assessment orders was rejected and the issue was decided against the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the pre-revision notice issued under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was liable to be quashed.
Analysis: The impugned notice was only a show-cause/pre-revision notice issued in the course of proceedings under Section 27(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The notice was based on inspection material and the petitioner was given an opportunity to submit a reply. Such proceedings could not be interdicted at that stage, and the Court found no legal basis to scuttle the statutory process.
Conclusion: The challenge to the pre-revision notice failed and the issue was decided in favour of the Revenue.
Final Conclusion: Both writ petitions were dismissed, while the petitioner was left free to submit a reply to the notice and the assessing authority was directed to proceed in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute provides a complete appellate mechanism, writ jurisdiction will not be used to create an extra-statutory adjudicatory forum, and a pre-revision show-cause notice in ongoing fiscal proceedings will not normally be quashed at the threshold.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
