Assessment limitation under Tamil Nadu VAT is context-sensitive; best judgment reassessment can follow deemed assessment, but repeated revisions on the same issue are barred.

Under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, the expression "date of assessment" in section 27 is context-sensitive and is not confined to the deemed assessment date under section 22(2); it may include a written assessment under section 22(2), a deemed assessment, a best judgment assessment under section 22(4), or a prior revision under section 27 where the later action concerns a different subject matter. Section 22(4) also operates independently of the deemed assessment mechanism, so a best judgment assessment is not barred merely because the section 22(2) date has passed. However, successive revisions cannot be used repeatedly on the same escaped turnover or same issue so as to keep limitation open indefinitely.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the period of six years under section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 commences from the deemed assessment under section 22(2), a speaking order under section 22(2), or a best judgment assessment under section 22(4); (ii) Whether a section 22(4) assessment can be made after the deemed assessment date under section 22(2) and whether repeated revisions can be sustained on the same issue.

Issue (i): Whether the period of six years under section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 commences from the deemed assessment under section 22(2), a speaking order under section 22(2), or a best judgment assessment under section 22(4)

Analysis: The statutory scheme distinguishes between deemed assessment under section 22(2), scrutiny-based selection under section 22(3), best judgment assessment under section 22(4), and revision of escaped turnover or wrong availment of input tax credit under section 27. The expression "date of assessment" in section 27 is not confined to deemed assessment alone. It can include a written assessment under section 22(2), a deemed assessment under section 22(2), a best judgment assessment under section 22(4), and even a prior revision under section 27, provided the later action concerns a different subject matter. The limitation structure of the Act does not support treating the deemed assessment date as the only point of initiation for section 27 in every case.

Conclusion: The six-year period under section 27 is not confined to the deemed assessment date under section 22(2) and may commence from the relevant assessment order under the statutory scheme.

Issue (ii): Whether a section 22(4) assessment can be made after the deemed assessment date under section 22(2) and whether repeated revisions can be sustained on the same issue

Analysis: Sections 22(2) and 22(4) operate in distinct fields. Section 22(2) is a deemed acceptance mechanism, while section 22(4) permits a best judgment assessment after enquiry and hearing where the return is incomplete, incorrect, or unsupported by required documents or proof of payment. A section 22(4) order is therefore not barred merely because the deemed assessment date under section 22(2) has passed. At the same time, repeated reassessments cannot be used to keep limitation indefinitely alive on the same escaped turnover or same issue, because that would defeat finality in assessment.

Conclusion: A section 22(4) assessment can be made after the deemed assessment date under section 22(2), but successive revisions cannot be founded on the same issue repeatedly.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions were disposed of on the above legal position, the impugned action was not set aside on limitation alone, and the ancillary penalty component was cancelled.

Ratio Decidendi: For the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, the expression "date of assessment" in section 27 is context-sensitive and may include a deemed assessment under section 22(2) or a regular best judgment assessment under section 22(4), but the revisional power cannot be used to perpetuate limitation indefinitely on the same escaped turnover.

---