SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

Govt scraps ban on export of onionFormer Delhi Congress chief Arvinder Singh Lovely joins BJP with three moreUS Nurse convicted of killing 17 patients - 700 yrs of jail-term awardedGST - Payment of pre-deposit through Form GST DRC-03 instead of the prescribed Form APL-01 - Petitioner attributes it to technical glitches - Respondent is the proper authority to decide the question of fact: HC2nd Session of India-Nigeria Joint Trade Committee held in AbujaGST - Since SCN is bereft of any details and suffers from infirmities that go to the root of the cause, SCN is quashed and set aside: HC1717 candidates to contest elections in phase 4 of Lok Sabha ElectionsGST - Once Appellate Authority comes to the conclusion that SCN was issued by an officer who was not competent; reply was also considered by an incompetent authority and the Competent Authority had not applied its independent mind, Appellate Authority could not have assumed original jurisdiction and proceeded further with the matter: HC7th India-Indonesia Joint Defence Cooperation Committee meeting held in New DelhiGST - Neither the Show Cause Notice nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, therefore, the same cannot be sustained: HCMining sector registers record production in FY 2023-24GST - If the proper officer was of the view that the reply is unclear and unsatisfactory, he could have sought further details by providing such opportunity - Having failed to do so, order cannot be sustained - Matter remanded: HCAnother quake of 6.0 magnitude rocks Philippines; No damage reported so farI-T - Initial burden of proof rested on assessee to substantiate his claim of having incurred expenditure on improvement of property: ITATTrade ban: Israel hits back against Turkey with counter-measuresI-T - Agricultural income can be treated by ITO as undisclosed income in absence of any substantial / corroborative material to prove same: ITATCanada arrests three persons in alleged killing of Sikh separatistI-T - Income from sale of property has to be classified & characterised only in manner of computation as per section 45(2): ITATCus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political events
 
TNVAT- Whether clerical error and arithmetical error alone could fall within scope of rectification u/s 84 - No, says High Court

By TIOL News Service

CHENNAI, JAN 25, 2016: PETITIONER is a registered dealer under Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. Revised orders of assessment were passed for the years 2006-07 to 2010 -11 as against which petitioner did not file appeal, but filed Rectification Petitions under Section 84 of the TNVAT Act, 2006, stating that there is an error apparent on the face of the orders of revised assessment.

Assessing authority passed orders on these petitions re-confirming the demand of VAT holding that 'error apparent on the face of the record' used in Section 84 of the TNVAT Act, 2006, would apply only for correction of clerical and arithmetical mistakes.

The Court found that the authority did not examine the merits of the Rectification Petitions but rejected them at the threshold on the ground of maintainability.

The Court referred to an earlier decision of the High Court wherein an identical issue was examined by the Court. While considering the scope of Section 84 of the TNVAT Act, 2006, the Court in that case held that Section 84 of the TN VAT Act, 2006, does not state that it is only pertaining to correction of arithmetical errors or clerical errors. The Court further held that though Section 84 states that it is a power for rectification, in effect, the language employed in Section 84 would confer a power on the Authority to review its decision, if there is error apparent on the face of the record. The court observed that an order passed contrary to the provisions of the statute or the judgments of the High Court or the Supreme Court, which are covered on the issue and binding on the Authorities, when not considered or when the factual aspect has not been correctly stated, a mistake would occur on the face of the record. The Court ruled that the power under Section 84 is neither limited nor circumscribed as understood by the Authority in the impugned orders.

The Court held that the impugned orders do not address the real issue and that no endeavour was made by the Authority to examine as to whether the error pointed out by the petitioner was an error apparent on the face of the record. Accordingly, the Court set aside the orders and remitted the matter back to the authority for passing fresh orders.

(See 2016-TIOL-149-HC-MAD-VAT)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST