Coercive tax recovery requires prior assessment; bank account attachment was invalid for years without assessment orders.

Coercive recovery under Section 45 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 can be used only after tax liability has crystallised by assessment for the relevant year. A recovery communication cannot validly cover multiple assessment years where assessment orders have not yet been passed for all years included in the demand. The Madras High Court held that attachment and withholding from a bank account were invalid to the extent they related to years with no assessment order, because recovery proceedings cannot precede assessment. The writ petition was accordingly allowed in part.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue could invoke Section 45 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 to attach and withhold amounts from the petitioner's bank account for multiple assessment years, including years for which no assessment order had been passed.

Analysis: Section 45 authorises coercive recovery only in respect of amounts that have crystallised pursuant to assessment. The impugned communication covered a block of assessment years from 2006-07 to 2016-17, but the materials placed before the Court showed that assessment orders had not been passed for all such years before the attachment direction was issued. A single recovery communication could not validly cover years for which no assessment order existed, since recovery proceedings cannot precede assessment.

Conclusion: The impugned attachment communication was invalid to the extent it covered assessment years for which no assessment order had been passed, and the writ petition was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Coercive recovery under Section 45 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 can be initiated only after the tax liability has been crystallised by assessment for the relevant assessment year.

---