9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1802X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ently, called upon the petitioner to appear for the personal hearing on 29.10.2018. Therefore, it is evident that the Assessing Officer has given the opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner only after receipt of the objections raised from them and not before the same. There is no point in saying that the petitioner should have been given an opportunity of personal hearing in pursuant to the second reply especially, when they have failed to utilise the opportunity given through the notice dated 17.102.018. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner, as if the personal hearing was not given to them, is not sustainable. Since this Court finds that the impugned orders of assessment were passed after following the principles of na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of personal hearing. He further submitted that while such being the position, the Assessing Officer has issued the final notice on 17.10.2018, for which, the petitioner made a reply on 12.11.2018 seeking for personal hearing once again. Therefore, the learned counsel contended that passing the impugned order on the very next day i.e., 13.11.2018 without affording an opportunity of personal hearing is erroneous and in violation of principles of natural justice. 5. Learned Government Advocate, on the other hand contended that the petitioner failed to utilise the opportunity of personal hearing given to them on 29.10.2018 which was clearly indicated in the final notice dated 17.10.2018. Therefore, he contended that the petitioner is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , wherein and whereby, they sought for personal hearing. While issuing the second notice styled as final notice dated 17.10.2018, the Assessing Officer has dealt with the reply submitted by the petitioner dated 14.06.2016 and consequently, called upon the petitioner to appear for the personal hearing on 29.10.2018. Therefore, it is evident that the Assessing Officer has given the opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner only after receipt of the objections raised from them and not before the same. Further, it is seen that the second reply submitted by the petitioner in pursuant to the final notice dated 17.10.2018 appears to be the reproduction of the very same reply made on 14.06.2016 and therefore, there is no point in saying tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
