2024 (2) TMI 292 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Violation of principles of natural justice - prior to the passing of the impugned order, neither opportunity for filing the reply nor the opportunity of personal hearing was provided by the respondent to the petitioner - HELD THAT - In the present case, it appears that the notices dated 24.12.2021, 24.03.2023 and 15.05.2023 and the assessment order dated 25.05.2023 have been uploaded in the web portal in the View Additional Notices and Orders column and the same were not at all physically served to the petitioner, due to which, the petitioner was unaware about the said notice. Hence, the reasons provided by the petitioner for being unaware of the notice, which was uploaded in the web portal, are appears to be genuine - Further, this Court is of the view that no order can be passed without providing sufficient opportunities to the petitioner. However, in the present case, no reply was filed by the petitioner and no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. The impugned order dated 25.05.2023 is set aside. While setting aside the impugned order, this Court remits the matter back to the respondents. The petitioner is directed to file the reply to the show cause notice dated 24.03.2023 within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Thereafter, the respondent is directed to dispose of the matter after providing sufficient opportunities to the petitioner. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are violation of principles of natural justice, failure to provide opportunity for filing reply and personal hearing, and setting aside the impugned order.

Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The petitioner challenged the impugned order dated 25.05.2023, claiming that prior notices were uploaded on the web portal but not physically served, leading to unawareness. The petitioner argued that no opportunity for filing a reply or personal hearing was provided, violating principles of natural justice.

Failure to Provide Opportunity for Filing Reply and Personal Hearing:
The respondent contended that despite uploading the notice on the web portal, the petitioner did not attend the personal hearing. However, the respondent assured compliance with any order from the Court. The Court noted the lack of physical service of notices and absence of reply or personal hearing opportunities for the petitioner.

Setting Aside the Impugned Order:
The Court found that the petitioner's reasons for being unaware of the uploaded notice were genuine. It emphasized that no order can be passed without sufficient opportunities for the petitioner. As a result, the impugned order dated 25.05.2023 was set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the respondents for the petitioner to file a reply within 21 days and for the respondent to dispose of the matter after providing adequate opportunities.

Conclusion:
The Court set aside the impugned order, directing the petitioner to file a reply within 21 days and the respondent to provide sufficient opportunities for the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed accordingly.