2018 (9) TMI 482 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Principles of Natural Justice - Held that - The Petition was adjourned on various occasions to enable the State to file reply. The learned Additional Government Advocate states that he has taken instructions from Respondent No.2- Commissioner and he states that factual assertions made by the Petitioner as above are correct. If the factual assertions made by the Petitioner, which we have reproduced are correct, then the case for breach of principles of natural justice before passing the impugned order is made out - prayer as sought for by the Petitioner will have to be allowed and the Commissioner will have to now proceed after giving hearing to the Petitioner. The proceedings are restored before the Respondent No.3 - Impugned order set aside.

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenge to order based on breach of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The Petitioner challenged an order dated 31 March 2018 passed by Respondent No. 3, alleging a breach of principles of natural justice. The Petitioner claimed that reminders for hearings were not received in time, affecting their ability to participate in the proceedings. The Petitioner filed review applications highlighting the procedural irregularities and lack of response from the Respondent. The Court considered the factual assertions made by the Petitioner to be correct, indicating a potential breach of natural justice.

The Court, after hearing both parties, concluded that if the factual assertions by the Petitioner were accurate, then there was indeed a breach of principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Court quashed the order dated 31 March 2018 and directed the proceedings to be restored before Respondent No. 3. The Court instructed the Commissioner to provide a hearing to the Petitioner and proceed in accordance with the law. The Petitioner was directed to appear before Respondent No. 3 on a specified date, and the Respondent was given eight weeks to pass appropriate orders.

The judgment emphasized the importance of upholding principles of natural justice in administrative proceedings. By setting aside the impugned order and restoring the proceedings, the Court ensured that the Petitioner's right to a fair hearing was protected. The decision highlighted the significance of procedural fairness and the duty of administrative authorities to provide a reasonable opportunity for parties to present their case. The ruling serves as a reminder of the fundamental principles governing administrative law and the need for adherence to due process in decision-making.