Reasonable opportunity of hearing must be effective and adequate before ex parte appellate disposal is sustained.

A reasonable opportunity of hearing under section 34(3) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act requires more than mere service of notice; it must be effective and adequate in the appellate process. The court noted that the assessee's representative had appeared on one date, sought adjournments on others, and filed an affidavit explaining non-appearance on the final date. A defective adjournment request did not justify denial of hearing rights. The order upholding ex parte disposal was held unsustainable and required reconsideration after giving a real opportunity to be heard.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the first appeal under section 34(3) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, and whether the order upholding the ex parte appellate disposal was sustainable.

Analysis: The provision requires not merely the issuance of notice but an opportunity of hearing that is reasonable, effective, and adequate. On the facts, the appellate proceedings had been posted on several dates, but the material placed before the Tribunal showed that the assessee's authorised representative had appeared on one date, sought adjournments on other dates, and had also filed an affidavit explaining non-appearance on the final hearing date. A defective adjournment application did not justify denial of the statutory hearing right. The Tribunal failed to consider the affidavit and the surrounding circumstances, and therefore did not properly test whether the assessee had in fact been afforded a real opportunity to be heard.

Conclusion: The assessee was denied a reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard. The order of the Tribunal was unsustainable, and the matter was required to be reconsidered afresh after affording such opportunity.

---