Statutory appeal bar in VAT reassessment, with deemed assessment and reassessment provisions read together within limitation.

In fiscal reassessment disputes under the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, the High Court noted that writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, particularly when the assessee received notice and an opportunity to object. It further explained that the deemed assessment amendment under Section 22(2) and the reassessment power under Section 28 were to be read together to support the statutory scheme for earlier assessment years, subject to notice and opportunity. Because the reassessment notice was issued within the prescribed six-year period, the proceedings were treated as not illegal on grounds of retrospectivity or limitation, and the assessee was left to pursue the appellate remedy.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petitions were maintainable in view of the availability of an efficacious statutory appeal against the assessment proceedings; (ii) Whether the amendment introducing deemed assessment under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and the consequential reassessment under Section 28 could be applied to the returns for the earlier assessment years within the prescribed limitation.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petitions were maintainable in view of the availability of an efficacious statutory appeal against the assessment proceedings.

Analysis: The impugned notice and revised assessment proceedings were issued after affording an opportunity to file objections and participate in the enquiry. The assessment authority was competent to decide the factual and legal objections, including the plea regarding applicability of the amended provision. In fiscal matters, the availability of a statutory appellate remedy ordinarily bars invocation of writ jurisdiction, especially when there is no complaint of lack of notice, lack of jurisdiction, or breach of natural justice.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable and the assessee had to pursue the statutory appeal remedy.

Issue (ii): Whether the amendment introducing deemed assessment under Section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and the consequential reassessment under Section 28 could be applied to the returns for the earlier assessment years within the prescribed limitation.

Analysis: The amendment created a deemed assessment for returns filed for the specified earlier years where no assessment order had been passed, and the reassessment power under Section 28 was intended to protect revenue in cases of escaped turnover. The provisions were read together to give effect to the legislative scheme, subject to notice and opportunity to the assessee. The reassessment notice was issued within the six-year period prescribed, and the amendment would be rendered ineffective if the consequential reassessment power were denied operation.

Conclusion: The amended scheme was applicable, and the reassessment proceedings were not illegal on the ground of retrospectivity or limitation.

Final Conclusion: The assessee failed to establish any jurisdictional error or infirmity warranting interference, and the assessment challenge had to be pursued before the appellate forum.

Ratio Decidendi: In fiscal reassessment matters, where the statute provides notice, opportunity, and an effective appeal, writ jurisdiction should not be invoked to bypass the statutory remedy, and a deeming-assessment provision may be read with the reassessment provision to uphold the legislative scheme within the prescribed limitation.

---