2017 (7) TMI 1354 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Principles of natural justice - Validity of assessment order - reasonable opportunity of hearing not provided to the petitioner - HELD THAT - In the instant case, on going through the facts and circumstances of the case, and the observations made by the Assessing Officer in the impugned assessment orders, it is evidently clear that the petitioner did not have effective and sufficient opportunity to put forth their contention. This is sufficient to hold that the impugned orders are bad in law. The matters are remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration - Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Violation of principles of natural justice in assessment orders under CST Act for multiple years.

In the judgment delivered by the High Court of Madras, the petitioner, a registered dealer under the TNVAT Act and CST Act, challenged assessment orders issued under the CST Act for the years 2011-12 to 2014-15. The primary contention raised was the violation of principles of natural justice. The court noted that although there were slight variations in each case, the common ground across all petitions was the same. Previously, similar contentions raised under the TNVAT Act had resulted in orders being set aside due to lack of effective opportunity for the petitioner to present their case. Upon reviewing the facts and circumstances, the court found that the petitioner was not given adequate opportunity to present their contentions, rendering the impugned orders legally flawed.

Consequently, the High Court allowed all the Writ Petitions, setting aside the impugned orders and remanding the matters back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The petitioner was granted 15 days to submit objections and supporting documents, following which the respondent was directed to provide a personal hearing to the petitioner and redo the assessment in compliance with the law. Additionally, assessments under the TNVAT Act, which were also set aside in a previous order, were to be redone after affording the petitioner a proper opportunity. The court concluded by allowing all the Writ Petitions, with no costs imposed, and closed the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions.