9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed in each case without considering the objections filed by the petitioners in response to the notice of proposal and therefore, it violates the principles of natural justice. It is further contended that the Assessing Officer has proceeded to pass the impugned orders only by observing that this Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 2(11) of the Tamil Nadu VAT Act, by order dated 05.04.2016, without considering the fact that the Division Bench, even though upheld the validity of Section 2(11), has specifically granted liberty to the dealers to submit their objections and therefore, such objections are to be considered and decided on merits. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that when similar orders we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e batch of cases, which were heard by the Division Bench. Having steered clear of this position, it has to be seen as to whether the first respondent is justified in passing the impugned orders, purportedly, to be consequence upon the decision of the Division Bench, dated 05.04.2016. Unfortunately, the Assessing Officer failed to note that the Division Bench has only decided the constitutional validity of the Section 2 (11), and with regard to other issues, granted liberty to the dealers to submit their objections, if they have approached at the stage of the revision notices, as in the petitioner's case. 18. Thus, the first respondent was bound to consider the objections filed by the petitioner, and pass a speaking order. It would be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the impugned orders have been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. As pointed out earlier, the oral prayer sought for by the petitioner, seeking leave of this Court to file Review Petitions before the second respondent cannot be acceded to, in the light of the facts noted above and observations made thereon. 20. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, the Writ Petitions are allowed, the impugned orders are set aside and b the first respondent is directed to consider the objections filed by the petitioner, dated 06.04.2017, afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the authorized representative of the petitioner and pass a speaking order on merits and in accordance with law. As stated above, if the first respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
