Natural justice challenge to revised assessment failed where objections under Rule 10(2) were considered and statutory remedy remained available.

A revised assessment order was not shown to be vitiated by breach of natural justice where the assessment record showed that the taxpayer had raised multiple objections, including the Rule 10(2) point, and the Assessing Officer had expressly considered and rejected them. The challenge on that ground therefore failed. The writ petition was also not entertained because the proper remedy, if the taxpayer remained aggrieved by the interpretation of Rule 10(2), was to pursue the statutory appellate or other remedies rather than invoke writ jurisdiction against the assessment order.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revised assessment order was vitiated for violation of natural justice on the ground that the proviso to Rule 10(2) of the KVAT Rules was not properly considered, and whether the writ petition challenging the assessment order was maintainable.

Analysis: The assessment record showed that the petitioner had raised multiple contentions in reply to the notice and that the objection based on Rule 10(2) was specifically noticed and dealt with by the Assessing Officer. The revised assessment was passed after considering and rejecting the contentions raised by the petitioner. In such a situation, there was no basis to hold that the order was vitiated for breach of natural justice. If the petitioner remained aggrieved by the interpretation adopted on Rule 10(2), the proper course was to pursue the remedies provided under the statute rather than invoke writ jurisdiction against the assessment order.

Conclusion: The challenge based on violation of natural justice failed, and the writ petition was not entertained because the petitioner had an efficacious statutory remedy.

---