TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court overturns assessment order for lack of natural justice, remits for fresh consideration.</h1> <h3>M/s. Bright Point India Pvt. Ltd Versus The Assistant Commissioner, The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kancheepuram & The Joint Commissioner (CT)</h3> M/s. Bright Point India Pvt. Ltd Versus The Assistant Commissioner, The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kancheepuram & The Joint Commissioner (CT) - ... Issues:Challenge to assessment order based on violation of principles of natural justice.Analysis:The writ petition was filed challenging the assessment order dated 27.06.2014 on the grounds of violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner, a registered dealer under the TNVAT Act, contended that the assessment was reopened by the 1st respondent without affording sufficient opportunity to be heard. Despite specific requests made by the petitioner, the impugned order was passed without providing a reasonable opportunity for the petitioner to present their case. The assessment was reopened based on a report by the Enforcement Wing authorities, resulting in disallowance of sales return and reversal of Input Tax Credit (ITC), which the petitioner believed was unjustifiable. The court held that the impugned order was liable to be set aside due to the lack of opportunity for the petitioner to be heard.The petitioner had filed an appeal challenging the assessment order before the authority concerned, but it was beyond the limitation period of 60 days. Although the mandatory pre-deposit amount was paid, the appeal was returned as barred by limitation. As a result, the petitioner had no other remedy but to challenge the assessment order before the High Court. The main contention was the violation of principles of natural justice, as the authority passed the impugned order without providing sufficient opportunity for the petitioner to present their case. The court emphasized that the impugned order was passed without affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to be heard, which was a clear violation of principles of natural justice.In the final judgment, the High Court set aside the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent and remitted the matter back to the assessing authority for fresh consideration. The court directed the petitioner to file necessary objections along with all documentary evidence within two weeks from the date of receiving the order. The assessing authority was instructed to consider the objections and evidence, and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with the law within six weeks, after affording the petitioner an opportunity for a personal hearing. Failure to comply with the directions would allow the respondent to pass appropriate orders. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
