Court upholds re-assessment orders, denies writ petitions citing procedural fairness. Petitioner advised to appeal.

The court rejected the writ petitions challenging re-assessment orders, stating that the petitioner had the opportunity to present evidence and appear before the reassessing authority. The court emphasized the absence of a violation of natural justice principles and advised the petitioner to address concerns through the appellate authority. The court found no grounds for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution but granted liberty to challenge the orders before the appellate authority. The office was directed to promptly return certified copies of annexures, and the appellate authority was to consider the writ petitions' pendency in case of appeal delays.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to re-assessment order without opportunity to petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the re-assessment order dated June 4, 2014, covering specific periods, following directions from the Tribunal. The petitioner contended that the authority passed the re-assessment orders without providing an opportunity for the petitioner to present their case. The court examined the contention along with the material on record, including the impugned orders. It was noted that post the Tribunal's judgment, the petitioner appeared before the reassessing authority, submitted books of accounts, and other relevant evidence for re-assessment purposes.

The court emphasized that since the petitioner had presented evidence and appeared before the reassessing authority, there was no violation of the principle of natural justice. The court held that if the petitioner disagreed with the authority's conclusions based on the evidence presented, the appellate authority should address those concerns. Consequently, the court concluded that there was no ground for interference with the re-assessment orders under Article 226 of the Constitution. The writ petitions were rejected, but the petitioner was granted the liberty to challenge the orders before the appellate authority.

Additionally, the court directed the office to return certified copies of all annexures produced in the writ petitions promptly, subject to filing copies for the record. It was also noted that the pendency of the writ petitions before the court should be considered by the appellate authority in case of any delay in filing an appeal.

---