Rectification limited to apparent errors under GST law; prior-order disputes must be taken to the appellate authority.

Rectification under Section 161 of the Tamil Nadu GST Act is limited to correcting an error apparent on the face of the record, and it cannot be used to reopen a matter already covered by an earlier order. On the facts, the dispute for the same period had already been dealt with in prior proceedings, so the rejection of the rectification request was found unjustified and was quashed. The Court also treated the appellate mechanism under GST law as adequate to address the demand and directed that the petitioner be heard by the appellate authority before a consolidated order is passed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the rectification application under Section 161 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was sustainable when the grievance related to a matter already covered by an earlier order, and whether the impugned order required interference with liberty to proceed before the appellate authority.

Analysis: Rectification under Section 161 is confined to correction of an error apparent on the face of the record. On the facts, the dispute had already arisen in earlier proceedings for the same period, and the Court found no justification for initiating a second set of proceedings on the same issue. The rejection of the rectification request was therefore not justified. The Court also considered the appellate framework under the GST law to be adequate to address the demand and directed that the petitioner be heard by the appellate authority for passing a consolidated order.

Conclusion: The impugned rejection was quashed, and the matter was left to be dealt with by the appellate authority after hearing the petitioner.

---