Statutory rectification must be decided by the assessing authority, not pre-empted by writ courts in tax review.

A writ court cannot itself decide a statutory rectification request or pre-empt the assessing authority's jurisdiction under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. Where an assessee alleges mistakes apparent on the face of the record, the proper course is for the assessing authority to examine the rectification petition in accordance with law and after hearing the assessee. Judicial review under Article 226 cannot substitute the court's view for the statutory authority on whether rectification is warranted. The writ dismissal was therefore unsustainable, and the matter had to be remitted for fresh consideration of the rectification request on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ court was justified in rejecting the assessee's challenge to the assessment orders without permitting the assessing authority to consider the rectification petition under the rectification provision of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and whether the court could itself examine and reject the rectification request on the ground that the alleged errors were not apparent on the face of the record.

Analysis: The remedy of rectification is a statutory and discretionary power vested in the assessing authority and is to be exercised according to law when the circumstances for its exercise exist. In judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the court cannot supplant the statutory authority by deciding the rectification petition itself or by substituting its own view for that of the assessing officer. The proper course was for the authority to consider whether the alleged mistakes constituted errors apparent on the face of the record under Section 84 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, after giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing.

Conclusion: The dismissal of the writ petitions could not be sustained, and the matter had to be sent back to the assessing authority for consideration of the rectification petition on merits and in accordance with law.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded, the writ court's order was set aside, and the assessing authority was directed to decide the rectification petition afresh after hearing the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ court cannot itself exercise or pre-empt a statutory rectification jurisdiction vested in the assessing authority, and must instead require that authority to consider the request according to law.

---