Court overturns tax order, mandates fresh review with deposit condition. Exemption claim to be properly considered.

The court set aside the impugned order under the Central Sales Tax Act due to the lack of a personal hearing and proper consideration of the exemption claim. The petitioner's writ petition was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the respondent for fresh consideration with a condition to deposit 50% of the tax amount. The respondent was directed to review the case, consider the petitioner's exemption claim documents, and provide a fair opportunity for the petitioner, with no costs awarded.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to impugned order under Central Sales Tax Act, principles of natural justice, levy of penalty on tax-exempt items, opportunity for personal hearing, consideration of exemption claim, setting aside of impugned order, remittance for fresh consideration with deposit condition.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenges an order passed by the respondent under the Central Sales Tax Act. The petitioner contends that despite requesting a 30-day extension in response to a show cause notice, the respondent did not respond and issued the impugned order without granting an opportunity for a hearing, violating principles of natural justice. The petitioner also argues against the imposition of a penalty on items exempt from tax.

The Additional Government Pleader argues that the petitioner failed to approach the authority in a timely manner regarding the exemption claim and suggests that the petitioner can have another opportunity by depositing 50% of the tax amount. The judge acknowledges both sides' submissions.

The petitioner's main grievance is the lack of a personal hearing before the impugned order was passed, especially concerning the claim for exemption on certain items. Despite the petitioner's replies seeking an extension and exemption consideration, the respondent proceeded with the order without due consideration.

The judge notes that the authority is responsible for evaluating exemption claims and decides to set aside the impugned order. The writ petition is allowed, and the matter is sent back to the respondent for fresh consideration with a condition that the petitioner must deposit 50% of the tax amount by a specified date. The respondent is directed to review the case, considering the petitioner's documents related to the exemption claim and providing a fair opportunity for the petitioner. No costs are awarded, and related petitions are closed.

---