2023 (10) TMI 490

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cting the challenge to the impugned orders of assessment for the assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08 on the premise that the appellant is bound to prefer an appeal and the filing of the rectification petition is only to circumvent the filing of a statutory appeal, which mandates pre-deposit. 3. The appellant was a registered dealer under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as "the TNVAT Act") engaged in execution of works contract. They had filed returns for the relevant assessment years viz., 2006-07 and 2007-08 and were deemed to have been assessed under Section 22(2) of the TNVAT Act. While so, the appellant's place of business was inspected by the Enforcement Wing Officers on 23.06.2010 and certain de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n was made by adding gross profit of 7% to the purchase value, while the company has incurred losses during the relevant assessment years and thus, the question of addition of gross profit is unsustainable. e. That the restriction under Section 6 of the TNVAT Act in respect of the interstate purchases falls foul of Part XIII of the Constitution of India. f. That the impugned orders of assessment suffer from the above errors which are apparent on the face of the record and thus, sought for rectification, after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellant. 5. After filing of the above rectification petition on 30.01.2014, writ petitions came to be filed on 19.12.2014 challenging the orders of assessment while praying for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the TNVAT Act to an assessee if the order is shown to suffer from error apparent on the face of record. The order of the learned Judge in effect results in taking away from the appellant, the statutory remedy by way of rectification petition. 8. It is trite law that the Court in exercise of its power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, would not direct a statutory authority to exercise its discretion in a particular manner, but would only command the statutory authority to perform its duty by exercising the discretion according to law (Lekhraj Sathramdas Lalvani v.N.M.Shah, Deputy Custodian-cum-Managing Officer, AIR 1966 SC 334 State of Uttar Pradesh v, Raja Ram Jaiswal, (1985) 3 SCC 131; Chingleput Bottlers....