2019 (4) TMI 527

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Act, 2006. According to the petitioner, as against the Assessment order dated 07.05.2015 passed under Section 27 of the TN VAT Act, 2006 by the second respondent, they preferred an Appeal before the first respondent on 28.07.2015 under Section 51 of the TN VAT Act,2006. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that they received the original assessment order dated 07.05.2015 on 12.05.2015. After receipt of the original Assessment order dated 12.05.2015, they filed an application under Section 84 of the TN VAT Act, 2006 seeking for rectification on 04.06.2015 which came to be rejected on 25.06.2015. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal against the original assessment order dated 28.07.2015 before the first respondent under section 51 of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct any alleged errors has the effect of leaving the original order intact. It is only when the rectification is ordered and as a consequence, one of the party is aggrieved by such modification, a remedy is required to be provided. The relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted as under:- "7. Similar view was also taken in the decision of this Court reported in 114 STC 359 STATE OF TAMIL NADU v. SPEEDLINE AGENCIES. This Court, in paragraph 5 of the judgment, pointed out as follows:- "Any order made by an authority declining to correct any alleged errors has the effect of leaving the original order intact. It is only when rectification is ordered, and as consequence, one of the parties is aggrieved by such modificati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he petitioner on 12.05.2015. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a rectification application under Section 84 of the TN VAT Act, 2006 on 04.06.2015 which was rejected by the second respondent on 25.06.2015 and the rejection order copy was received by the petitioner on 01.07.2015. The period of 21 days when the application for rectification was kept pending before the second respondent under Section 84 of the TN VAT Act, 2006 has to be excluded for the purpose of calculating the period of limitation. If that period is excluded, the appeal filed by the petitioner before the first respondent on 28.07.2015 is well within the prescribed period of 60 days as stipulated under Section 51 of the TN VAT Act, 2006. 8. Following the Division Bench j....