Reasonable opportunity in tax penalty proceedings defeats writ interference where notice, reply time, and objections were considered.

A challenge to penalty proceedings under section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 failed because the record showed notice, time to reply, and consideration of the dealer's objections and stock reconciliation materials before the penalty was modified. The authorities also found that complete accounts were not maintained or produced, supporting the penalty action. On these facts, the plea of denial of reasonable opportunity was not sustainable, and no jurisdictional or procedural defect was shown to justify interference under article 226.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty proceedings under section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 were vitiated for want of reasonable opportunity of hearing and whether interference under article 226 of the Constitution of India was warranted.

Analysis: The record showed that notice was issued and time was granted for reply, that the petitioner filed objections and stock reconciliation materials, and that the assessing and revisional authorities considered those objections before modifying the penalty. The authorities also recorded that the dealer had failed to maintain or produce complete accounts and that the conduct justified the penalty proceedings. On these facts, the plea of denial of reasonable opportunity was not sustainable, and the revised penalty could not be said to suffer from a jurisdictional or procedural defect calling for writ interference.

Conclusion: The challenge to the penalty proceedings failed, and the petition under article 226 was liable to be dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the record shows that notice, time to respond, and consideration of objections were afforded before imposition or revision of a tax penalty, a writ court will not interfere on a bare plea of denial of reasonable opportunity.

---