Rectification hearing under VAT law is mandatory only when assessment or penalty is enhanced; mere confirmation needs no hearing.

Under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, rectification is confined to correcting an error apparent on the face of the record. A notice and reasonable opportunity of hearing are mandatory only when the proposed rectification would enhance an assessment or penalty. Where the rectification merely confirms the existing assessment and does not increase tax or penalty, no statutory hearing is required. The Court held that a rectification request cannot be treated like a fresh assessment and upheld the rejection of the application.

---

---

Issues: Whether a dealer is entitled to a hearing in every rectification proceeding under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, even where the rectification does not enhance the assessment or penalty.

Analysis: Section 84 permits rectification of an error apparent on the face of the record. The proviso to sub-section (1) requires notice and a reasonable opportunity of hearing only when the proposed rectification has the effect of enhancing an assessment or penalty. A rectification request cannot be equated with a regular assessment, and reading a mandatory hearing into every such application would undermine the finality of assessments. On the facts, the impugned order merely confirmed the earlier assessment and did not enhance assessment or penalty; therefore, no statutory requirement of hearing arose.

Conclusion: The dealer was not entitled to an opportunity of hearing in the absence of any enhancement of assessment or penalty, and the rejection of the rectification request was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, a hearing is mandatory only where rectification is proposed to enhance assessment or penalty, not where the assessment is merely confirmed or no enhancement is made.

---