9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (2) TMI 856 - HC - Central ExciseViolation of principles of natural justice - grant of personal hearing to the Petitioner or not - ex parte Order finalizing the assessment or not - period from 01.04.2011 to 31.03.2012 - HELD THAT - The notice of hearing was issued on 28 May 2021 calling upon the Petitioner to remain present on 31 May 2021 at 11.00 a.m. The Petitioner requested for time. On 7 June 2021 the Respondents issued another notice and intimated the Petitioner to remain present on 8 June 2021 and 10 June 2021 at 12.00 noon (wrongly mentioned as 12.00 a.m.). The Petitioner applied for adjournment again on the ground that the notice was short notice). The Respondents ought to have given reasonable time to the Petitioner to remain present at the time of assessment. The notices issued by the Respondents further indicate that the first notice was issued after a long gap but a short notice whereas the second notice was issued to remain present within 48 hours or less - action on the part of the Respondents in not issuing notice granting reasonable time to the Petitioner to remain present and passing ex parte Order is passed in gross violation of principle of natural justice. The proceedings are restored to file before the Respondent No.2 - The Writ Petition is allowed.
Issues involved:
Challenge to ex parte Assessment Order due to lack of personal hearing and violation of principles of natural justice. Detailed Analysis: The Petitioner challenged an ex parte Assessment Order dated 11 June 2021 passed by Respondent No.2 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Respondents did not grant a personal hearing to the Petitioner before finalizing the assessment for the period from 01.04.2011 to 31.03.2012, disallowing all deductions claimed by the Petitioner. The Petitioner submitted various documents for reconciliation, but the Respondents passed the ex parte Order without granting an adjournment despite the Petitioner's request due to the Covid-19 situation. The Petitioner contended that the notices were issued with short notice, violating the principle of natural justice. The High Court analyzed the documents and notices issued by the Respondents. The Court noted that the first notice was issued after a long gap but with short notice, while the second notice required the Petitioner to remain present within 48 hours. The Court held that the Respondents should have given reasonable time for the Petitioner to appear during the assessment. The Court found the actions of the Respondents in passing the ex parte Order without granting reasonable time to be a gross violation of the principle of natural justice. As a result, the High Court quashed and set aside the Impugned Order dated 11 June 2021, directing the Petitioner to appear before the Assessment Authority on a specified date. The Petitioner was instructed to cooperate in passing a fresh Order in accordance with the law without seeking unnecessary adjournments. The Respondents were not required to issue a fresh notice for the next hearing. The Respondent No.2 was directed to pass a fresh Order within 8 weeks from the date of the Petitioner appearing, following the principles of natural justice. All contentions of the parties on merits were kept open, and the Writ Petition was allowed with no order as to costs. In conclusion, the High Court found in favor of the Petitioner, highlighting the importance of granting reasonable time for a party to be present during assessments to ensure the application of principles of natural justice.
|
