2017 (5) TMI 319 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Natural justice - validity of assessment order - the petitioner was not given sufficient opportunity to put forth their case by filing supporting documents - Held that - unless the petitioner is informed of the decision on their request for extension, they cannot be expected to proceed further either this way or that way. When a request is made by the petitioner seeking for extension of time by way of writing, such request has to be considered and decided either by accepting or rejecting the same and such decision has to be duly communicated to the assessee by fixing a next date of hearing so as to enable such assessee to be prepared for appearance on that day for completion of the assessment proceedings - the assessment order passed without intimating the decision taken on the request for extension of time, is in violation of the principles of natural justice and therefore on that ground alone, the assessment order has to be set aside - petition allowed - decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order on grounds of violation of principles of natural justice due to lack of opportunity to present supporting documents.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the assessment order dated 15.12.2016, claiming a violation of natural justice principles as they were not given sufficient opportunity to submit supporting documents. The respondent, represented by the learned Government Advocate, argued that the assessment was conducted after waiting for 20 days as requested by the petitioner, who failed to produce the documents within the specified time. The court noted that the petitioner had indeed requested 20 days to produce the documents on 07.11.2016, which was acknowledged by the respondent in the assessment order. However, the court emphasized that the decision on such requests must be communicated to the assessee, allowing them to prepare for further proceedings. Referring to a previous judgment, the court highlighted the necessity of promptly informing the assessee of the decision on time extension requests. In this case, the court found a violation of natural justice principles as the petitioner was not informed of the decision on their request, regardless of whether it was accepted or rejected. Consequently, the court set aside the assessment order solely on the grounds of this procedural lapse, without delving into the assessment's merits.

The court directed the matter to be remitted back to the respondent for a fresh assessment order, emphasizing the importance of providing the petitioner with a fair hearing opportunity. The petitioner was instructed to cooperate with the assessment proceedings and not unduly delay the process by filing unjustified extension requests. The respondent was mandated to inform the petitioner of the next hearing date, and upon receipt of the notice, the petitioner was required to attend with all necessary documents for the assessment proceedings. The court imposed a four-week timeline on the respondent to complete the reassessment process from the date of receiving a copy of the court's order. No costs were awarded, and the miscellaneous petitions were closed in connection with the case.