Court overturns assessment order for failure to consider objections, emphasizing judicial review

The court set aside the assessment order due to the assessing officer's failure to consider the petitioner's objections. The Government Advocate's inability to produce the file led to adverse inferences against the assessing officer for suppressing objections. Judicial review was emphasized, with directions for actions against the assessing officer. The court stressed the importance of due process and transparency in assessments, leading to the exclusion of the assessing officer from the department's circle.

---

---

Issues:
Assessment order challenged on grounds of suppressing objections filed by petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the assessment order, alleging that the assessing officer failed to consider objections filed by the petitioner, a violation of statutory provisions and natural justice principles. The court directed the Government Advocate to produce the files to verify if the petitioner's objections were received before the assessment order. Despite multiple adjournments, the Government Advocate failed to produce the file, leading the court to draw adverse inferences against the assessing officer for suppressing the petitioner's objections. Consequently, the court set aside the assessment order.

Further Details:
The Government Advocate's failure to produce the file raised suspicions about the correctness of the assessment order. The court expressed dissatisfaction with the Government Advocate's excuses and the assessing officer's secretive behavior. The court emphasized the importance of considering objections raised by the petitioner before passing the assessment order, highlighting the assessing officer's duty to produce files for court scrutiny.

Judicial Review and Actions:
The court emphasized that the assessing officer's actions are subject to judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The assessing officer's conduct, in this case, was deemed arbitrary and unacceptable, leading to directions for appropriate actions by the Secretary and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Department. The court criticized the assessing officer's arbitrary decision-making and directed for her exclusion from the department's assessment circle.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the assessment order due to the assessing officer's failure to consider the petitioner's objections. The court did not impose costs, and the connected Writ Petition Miscellaneous Petition was closed. The judgment highlighted the importance of following due process and ensuring transparency in assessment procedures, emphasizing the duty of assessing officers to act judiciously and comply with court directives.

---