9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (4) TMI 763 - HC - VAT and Sales Taxvalidity of order - Violation of principles of natural justice - Held that - the petitioner was not given an opportunity of personal hearing, which is a mandatory provision under Sec.22(4) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and that no notice was also issued to the petitioner before passing the impugned order, therefore, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside. Decided in favour of petitioner
Issues: Lack of opportunity of personal hearing and absence of prior notice before passing impugned orders.
In this judgment by the Madras High Court, the petitioners filed writ petitions seeking writs of Certiorarified Mandamus to challenge Order Nos. 859748/2011-12 and 859748/2012-13 dated 29.05.2015, alleging a lack of opportunity for personal hearing and absence of prior notice. The petitioner argued that they were not given a chance for personal hearing as required by Sec.22(4) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and no notice was issued before passing the impugned orders. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent acknowledged the lack of opportunity for personal hearing and absence of notice, agreeing that the matter should be decided afresh after providing the petitioner with an opportunity for personal hearing and issuing a notice. Considering the submissions from both sides and noting the mandatory nature of personal hearing under Sec.22(4) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, along with the absence of notice to the petitioner, the court set aside the impugned orders. The court remitted the matter back to the respondent for a fresh decision. The court directed the respondent to ensure the petitioner receives an opportunity for personal hearing as required by Sec.22(4) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, issue a notice to the petitioner, and decide the matter afresh based on merits and in accordance with the law. Ultimately, the writ petitions were allowed by the court with no costs imposed, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed, concluding the legal proceedings.
|
