Court sets aside assessment order under APVAT Act, 2005, due to lack of natural justice.

The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, setting aside the assessment order under the APVAT Act, 2005, due to a breach of natural justice principles. The court found that the petitioner was not given a proper opportunity for a personal hearing during the assessment process, despite submitting necessary documents through their authorized representative. The delay in challenging the order was attributed to valid reasons related to the petitioner's father's illness. The matter was remanded back to the respondents for further proceedings, with the petitioner instructed to file objections within a specified timeframe for a subsequent personal hearing.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge of assessment order under APVAT Act, 2005 alleging violation of natural justice principles.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged an assessment order under the APVAT Act, 2005, citing a violation of natural justice principles. The impugned order referred to several proceedings and communications, including a show cause notice dated 23.12.2016 to which the dealer responded seeking more time. Although the petitioner did not reply to the show cause notice, they submitted Form 501 certificates through their authorized representative. However, no notice of hearing was sent before the assessment order was passed, indicating a clear breach of natural justice principles.

The respondents argued that the petitioner delayed challenging the order, as the order was dated 28.02.2017 and the petitioner claimed not to have received it. The respondents produced an acknowledgment card showing delivery in March 2017, suggesting that the petitioner's delay in raising concerns after over 20 months was unjustified. The court considered these submissions carefully.

Regarding the delay in approaching the court, the postal acknowledgment card bore a signature in Telugu, attributed to someone named 'A. Anjaneyulu.' The petitioner explained the delay by stating that they were away due to the father's illness, who had suffered a paralytic attack at that time. Given the circumstances and the signature discrepancy, the court did not hold the delay against the petitioner.

Upon clearing the delay issue, the court noted that no independent opportunity for a personal hearing was granted during the assessment process. While the petitioner responded to the show cause notice and submitted Form 501 certificates through the authorized representative, there was no further communication or hearing provided. Consequently, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter back to the respondents. The petitioner was directed to file objections by a specified date, following which a personal hearing would be scheduled before fresh orders were issued. Any pending miscellaneous petitions were to be dismissed, and no costs were awarded.

---