Fresh hearing after change of officer not mandatory where assessee ignored notice and showed no prejudice in assessment proceedings.

An assessment under the KVAT Act was not interfered with for alleged denial of a fresh hearing after change of incumbent under Section 95. The assessee had received notice but filed no reply, produced no documents and did not attend the hearing, so the successor officer finalised the assessment on the material already on record. In these circumstances, the proviso to Section 95 did not create an entitlement to another hearing, especially since no prejudice was shown from the absence of such hearing. The challenge to the assessment therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment order could be interfered with for want of a fresh hearing to the assessee after change of incumbent under Section 95 of the KVAT Act.

Analysis: The assessment proceedings had been set in motion by notice, but the assessee did not file any reply, produce documents, or appear for the hearing offered in the notice. When the successor officer completed the assessment, the material already on record was the only basis available for finalisation. In these circumstances, the proviso to Section 95 did not entitle the assessee to an additional hearing, particularly when no prejudice was shown to have been caused by the absence of such hearing.

Conclusion: The assessee was not entitled to interfere with the assessment on the ground of denial of hearing after change of incumbent, and the challenge to the assessment failed.

---