2015 (4) TMI 298 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Violation of principles of natural justice - grievance of the petitioner that though detailed assessment orders have been passed, he was not given an opportunity - Held that - On the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, the impugned orders of assessment are set aside and the matters are remitted back to the respondent for passing fresh orders. The respondent is directed to accept 10% of the tax amount as determined in the impugned orders, which the petitioner has agreed to pay the same. On receipt of the said amount, the respondent can de freeze the Bank account of the petitioner and the respondent is directed to give an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as provided under Section 22(4) of the Act and decide the matter afresh on merits and in accordance with law. The learned counsel for the petitioner also agreed that the petitioner would appear before the respondent on 04.05.2015 for personal hearing. After hearing the petitioner on 04.05.2015, the respondent is directed to decide the matter on merits and in accordance with law. In case the petitioner fails to avail this opportunity on 04.05.2015, the authority is empowered to pass orders afresh on merits and in accordance with law based on the available records.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment orders, violation of principles of natural justice, opportunity for personal hearing, bank attachment, remittance of case back to respondent.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the orders of the respondent dated 12.11.2014 and 26.02.2015, seeking a redo of the assessment after being denied a personal hearing and requesting the lifting of a Bank Attachment. The petitioner's father previously managed the business, and after his demise, the petitioner took over. The petitioner argued that despite detailed assessment orders being issued, he was not given an opportunity to be heard.

The Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) contended that the petitioner was a defaulter, justifying the impugned order. However, the court noted that since the petitioner's father had passed away, the petitioner should have been afforded an opportunity to present his case before the assessment orders were finalized.

In light of the violation of principles of natural justice, the court set aside the assessment orders and remitted the matters back to the respondent for fresh orders. The respondent was directed to accept 10% of the tax amount, as agreed by the petitioner, to unfreeze the Bank account. Additionally, the respondent was instructed to provide the petitioner with a personal hearing as per Section 22(4) of the Act and decide the matter afresh based on merits and in accordance with the law.

The petitioner agreed to appear for a personal hearing on 04.05.2015. The respondent was directed to make a decision after this hearing. If the petitioner failed to attend, the authority could proceed to pass orders based on available records. The writ petition was disposed of with the above directions, with no costs incurred. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed accordingly.