Natural justice in rectification proceedings requires notice and hearing before disposing of a pending tax rectification request.

An order disposing of an additional rectification petition under section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was treated as a substantive rectification order, so it could not be passed without notice and a hearing. The High Court held that fair procedure required the assessing authority to hear the petitioner and then decide the pending rectification and additional rectification petitions together on merits. Because that opportunity was not given, the communication was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessing authority could dispose of the additional rectification petition under section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 without issuing notice and granting a hearing, and whether the resulting order was liable to be set aside.

Analysis: The impugned communication was found to be in substance an order disposing of the rectification request. Since the authority was required to issue notice, hear the petitioner, and then decide the rectification request on merits, the failure to provide such opportunity offended the requirement of fair procedure. The Court also noted that the rectification and additional rectification petitions remained pending and had to be considered together after hearing the petitioner.

Conclusion: The order dated 04.05.2023 was set aside, and the petitioner was directed to be heard on the pending rectification petitions before a fresh order was passed in accordance with law.

---