Limitation on reassessment under KVAT cannot be revived by the amended proviso after expiry of the original period.

The Kerala High Court analysed Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and held that reassessment notice could not be revived by the amended third proviso, which with effect from 01.04.2017 only extends time for completing assessments already validly initiated. Where the original five-year limitation period for reopening had already expired, the proviso did not save a later notice issued on 24.01.2018 for the 2011-12 year. The court therefore treated the reassessment proceedings as barred by limitation and answered the limitation question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the notice issued under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 on 24.01.2018 to reopen the assessment for 2011-12 was barred by limitation in view of the amended third proviso to Section 25(1).

Analysis: The main provision in Section 25(1) permits reopening only within the prescribed limitation period, while the third proviso, as amended with effect from 01.04.2017, extends time only for completion of assessments that had already been validly initiated. Reading the amended provision in the context of the different phraseology used in the main provision and the proviso, and in the light of the Supreme Court's interpretation of the same statutory scheme, the extension under the proviso could not revive assessments where the earlier five-year period had already expired. The notice issued after expiry of the unamended limitation period could therefore not be saved by the amended proviso.

Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings for 2011-12 were barred by limitation and the question of law on limitation was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

---