2019 (10) TMI 39 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - assessment year 2014-15 and 2015-16 - grievance of the petitioners in these writ petitions is that the impugned order of assessment was passed in each case without considering the objections filed by the petitioners in response to the notice of proposal - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The Assessing Officer has not referred to the objections filed by the petitioners dated 31.05.2019. Perusal of the objections filed by the petitioners, which is placed in the typed set of papers, would show that the petitioner made a detailed objection against the proposal. The Assessing Officer has not even referred to the said objections filed by the petitioners in the impugned orders of assessment. Therefore, it is evident that the impugned orders were passed totally by ignoring the objections raised by the petitioners and thus, it violates the principles of natural justice. The matter is remitted back to the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment after considering the objections raised by the petitioners and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law - Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging assessment orders for the years 2014-15 and 2015-16 due to lack of consideration of objections and violation of natural justice principles.

Analysis:
The petitioners challenged assessment orders for 2014-15 and 2015-16, alleging that the orders were passed without considering their objections, violating natural justice principles. They contended that the Assessing Officer based the orders on a previous court decision upholding a specific section's validity, without acknowledging the liberty granted to dealers to submit objections. The petitioners cited a previous case where similar orders were set aside for the same reason, emphasizing the need for a similar remedy in their cases.

The Special Government Pleader acknowledged the oversight in not considering the objections and agreed to remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer for reassessment. The Court noted that the same petitioner had previously challenged similar orders for different assessment years, which were set aside due to a violation of natural justice principles. The Court emphasized the importance of considering objections and granting a personal hearing, highlighting that the liberty to file objections was not merely a formality but a crucial aspect of due process.

In both the previous and current cases, the Assessing Officer failed to address the objections raised by the petitioners, leading to a violation of natural justice principles. The Court intervened, setting aside the assessment orders and remitting the matter back to the Assessing Officer for reassessment after considering the objections and providing a personal hearing. The Court emphasized the Assessing Officer's duty to consider objections thoroughly, cautioning against rehashing arguments already addressed by the court, and directing a comprehensive reconsideration of all factual issues raised in the objections.