2014 (8) TMI 372 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of order passed - earlier order passed in favour of assessee - In this proceeding earlier order was not considered by the authority - Revenue contends that no reply was submitted by the assessee - Held that - even if the petitioner did not give a reply, the authority should have considered the earlier order passed against the same petitioner and should have given a finding. But the authority, without taking into consideration the previous order passed and without even giving an opportunity to the petitioner, passed the impugned order, which is per se illegal - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order of respondent dated 05.05.2014 in TIN.33710040344/2008-09.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash the order of the respondent dated 05.05.2014 and requested a fresh order in line with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The petitioner argued that the impugned order was challenged due to a lack of notice and reference to an earlier order passed in favor of the petitioner. The subsequent Officer had passed an order without considering the previous decision and without providing notice to the petitioner. The authority withdrew the initial order but proceeded to pass the impugned order without proper consideration. The petitioner sought to set aside the order on these grounds.

The Additional Government Pleader for the respondent contended that the petitioner had not replied to the notice, leading to the confirmation of the proposal in the impugned order. However, the court did not accept this argument, stating that the authority should have considered the earlier order passed against the petitioner before making a decision. The court found the impugned order to be illegal as it was passed without taking into account the previous decision and without providing an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard. Consequently, the court set aside the impugned order and allowed the writ petition. The respondent was given the option to issue a fresh notice, if necessary, and provide an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard before passing any new orders. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.