SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 38999

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.SARAVANAN, J
Dass Camera Centre – Appellant
Versus
Commercial Tax Officer (ST), Harbour Assessment Circle – Respondent
W.P.No.3270 of 2024|W.P.No.3272 of 2024|W.P.No.3273 of 2024|W.M.P.Nos.3539, 3540 and 3541 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.N.Sri Prakash (In all W.Ps) for Mr.S.Eshwar
For the Respondents:Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran (In all W.Ps) Government Advocate

Assessment orders quashed as barred by six-year limitation under S.27 TNVAT Act from prior assessments.

Headnote:The petitioner challenged assessment orders passed under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (TNVAT Act) for assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, and 2010-11, seeking quashing on grounds of limitation under Section 27. Earlier assessments were completed in 2010 and 2011 prior to the amendment of Section 22 by Act No.23 of 2012 effective 01.07.2012. The court found the impugned orders dated 22.11.2021 and 27.06.2022 barred by limitation as notices were issued only from 23.01.2018, beyond six years from prior assessments. The key issue was whether the impugned assessments violated the limitation period in Section 27 of TNVAT Act, which allows notices within six years from the date of assessment. The court noted respondent's admission in counter-affidavit that first notice was on 23.01.2018, with no prior notices, confirming the orders were time-barred (paras 6-8). The impugned orders were quashed, recovery proceedings reversed, and refunds directed with interest within three months.

Table of Content
1. challenge to impugned assessment orders post prior assessments. (Para 2 , 4 , 5)
2. petitioner's contention on limitation violation. (Para 6 , 7)
3. confirmation of no prior notices, triggering limitation. (Para 8)
4. quashing orders and directing refunds with interest. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)

COMMON ORDER

By this common order, all these Writ Petitions are being disposed of.

2. In these Writ Petitions, the Petitioner has challenged the respective impugned Assessment Orders dated 22.11.2021 passed for the Assessment Years 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 and the impugned Assessment Order dated 27.06.2022 passed for the Assessment Year 2010-2011.

3. It appears that the Petitioner was earlier assessed under Section

22 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 on 20.04.2010, 01.03.2011 and 17.06.2011 for these Assessment Years. This was prior to the amendment to Section 22 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. Section 22 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was substituted by Section 4(3) of the Fifth Amendment Act No.23 of 2012, effective from

01.07.2012 as notified by G.O.No.82 dated 19.06.2012.

4. The case of the Petitioner is that after the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 stood replaced / substituted by the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the Petitioner closed the business but however failed to intimate the same to the Commercial Tax Department.

5. It is submitted that the Petitioner became aware of the impugned Orders only on 13.03.2023 when the Notice attaching the Petitioner’s Bank Account was served on the Petitioner intimating that the Assessment Orders came to be passed on the dates mentioned above.

6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that pursuant to the Notice(s) dated 23.01.2018, the impugned orders which have been passed are clearly beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 since the assessments were completed earlier on 20.04.2010, 01.03.2011 and 27.06.2011.

7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner has also drawn attention to Paragraph No.5(i) of the Counter Affidavit filed by the Respondent wherein it is admitted that the first of the Notice was issued only on 23.01.2018 followed by Notices dated 29.12.2020 and 23.03.2021.

8. On a specific query whether any Notice was issued earlier prior to 23.01.2018, the learned Government Advocate for the Respondent confirmed that no other Notices were issued prior to 23.01.2018. The limitation period prescribed under Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax, 2006 is clear. Notice can be issued only within six (6) years from the date of assessment.

9. Considering the same, the impugned Orders dated 22.11.2021 and the impugned Order dated 27.06.2022 for the respective Tax Periods are liable to be quashed and are accordingly quashed.

10. In view of the above, all the recovery proceedings initiated against the Petitioner by the Respondent are directed to be reversed and any recovery made shall be paid back to the Petitioner together with interest under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

11. These Writ Petitions, are thus, allowed. No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top