2020 (9) TMI 828 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - Validity of assessment orders - petitioner seeks one more personal hearing and some time to produce evidences in support of its contentions, which is ignored - HELD THAT - No serious objection is raised by the revenue to the suggestion given of the Court that the impugned order of assessment be set aside and be redone de novo after affording ample opportunity to the petitioner. The impugned orders of assessments are set aside and the matter remanded to the Assessing Authority to be redone - Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues Involved: Challenge to orders of assessment under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the periods 2017-18 to 2019-20 based on violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:

1. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The writ petitions challenged the orders of assessment passed under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the periods 2017-18 to 2019-20, citing a violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner contended that there was a lack of fair opportunity provided during the assessment process.

2. Response of Government Advocate:
Ms. G. Dhana Madhri, the learned Government Advocate representing the respondent, accepted notice on behalf of the respondent and acknowledged having received the advance copy of the writ petition. She was prepared to proceed with the matter as the point in question was concise. Both learned counsels agreed to dispose of the writ petitions finally at that stage.

3. Ignoring Request for Additional Hearing:
The impugned orders of assessment, dated 10.03.2020, were issued after a notice of personal hearing, during which the petitioner appeared and filed a written objection. The petitioner requested another personal hearing and time to provide supporting evidence. However, the Assessing Authority proceeded to pass adverse orders on the same date without granting the requested opportunity, which was contrary to a previous decision of the Court.

4. Court's Decision and Remand:
Considering the circumstances, the Court set aside the impugned orders of assessment and remanded the matter to the Assessing Authority for a fresh assessment. The petitioner was directed to submit any necessary documents supporting its contentions within two weeks. The petitioner was scheduled to appear before the Assessing Officer on a specified date for further proceedings, either via video conference or physical hearing, as mutually convenient. The Assessing Authority was instructed to pass orders within six weeks from the appearance date.

5. Disposal of Writ Petitions:
Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petitions in the mentioned terms, closing the connected miscellaneous petitions without imposing any costs on either party. The decision aimed to ensure a fair assessment process in compliance with the principles of natural justice.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues raised, the responses of the parties involved, the Court's decision, and the subsequent directions for the reassessment process, emphasizing the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice in such proceedings.