2021 (5) TMI 370 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Violation of the principles of natural justice - time granted to the petitioner to put forth its submissions were enough or not - Opportunity of hearing not provided - HELD THAT - R1 extends an opportunity of personal hearing and calls upon the petitioner to appear and file necessary documents in support of its claim on 11.02.2021. In response therewith the petitioner has filed a reply on 10.02.2021 referring to all annexures duly filed before the erstwhile Assessing Officer/R2. The impugned orders have come to be passed on 22.02.2021 without hearing the petitioner and without reference to the objections filed earlier by the petitioner. The dates and events as noticed by me in the preceding paragraphs will serve to establish that the respondent Officer has not adhered to the principles of natural justice in framing the impugned assessments. The time granted to the petitioner to put forth its submissions pursuant to R1 taking charge is woefully insufficient. Moreover, the notices issued prior to framing of assessments call upon the petitioner to file its objections as well as appear, all in the space of a week, which, in my view, is also not sufficient. The petitioner will appear before the Assessing Officer on Monday, the 10th of May, 2021 at 10.30. a.m., without expecting any further notice in this regard, either virtually or by way of physical hearing - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Challenge to three assessment orders under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 for the periods 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16, violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned orders.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to the challenge against three assessment orders dated 22.02.2021 under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. Initially, pre-assessment notices were issued on 25.04.2016, and objections were filed by the petitioner on 21.11.2016. However, there was a lack of progress in the matter until a notice was issued by a different officer on 05.02.2021, erroneously stating that the assessee had not responded to the earlier notices, despite objections being filed on 21.11.2016, which was a clear error in the notice.

Subsequently, the new officer extended an opportunity for a personal hearing and requested the petitioner to submit necessary documents by 11.02.2021. The petitioner responded by filing a reply on 10.02.2021, referencing all annexures previously submitted. Nevertheless, the impugned orders were passed on 22.02.2021 without hearing the petitioner or considering the objections filed earlier, indicating a violation of the principles of natural justice.

The court found that the respondent officer did not adhere to the principles of natural justice in framing the assessments. The time provided to the petitioner for submissions after the new officer took charge was deemed insufficient. Additionally, the short notice period for filing objections and appearing for the assessment was considered inadequate by the court.

Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the petitioner was directed to appear before the Assessing Officer on a specified date without further notice. The court instructed that the assessment orders should be passed de novo within four weeks from the specified date, emphasizing adherence to Standard Operating Procedures in force at that time. The Writ Petitions were disposed of with no costs, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed as well.