Court sets aside assessment orders, emphasizes procedural fairness in tax assessments, grants personal hearing to taxpayer.

The court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the assessment orders for Assessment Years 2012-2013 to 2016-2017, and directed the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment after granting the petitioner a personal hearing within six weeks. The judgment emphasizes the importance of procedural fairness in tax assessments, highlighting the right of taxpayers to present their case and contest assessments, particularly when issues of liability are involved. The decision underscores the significance of due process and timely resolution of tax disputes while upholding principles of natural justice.

---

---

Issues involved: Challenge to assessment orders for Assessment Years 2012-2013 to 2016-2017.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to writ petitions challenging assessment orders for specific assessment years. The impugned orders were based on the fact that the dealers from whom the petitioner made purchases had not paid taxes. The petitioner, in response to the notice of proposal, argued against being held liable for the selling dealer's tax obligations and requested a personal hearing. However, the Assessing Officer proceeded with the assessment without providing the requested personal hearing. The court observed that when a personal hearing is requested, the Assessing Officer must allow the petitioner to present their case before making a decision based on non-payment of taxes by the selling dealer. The court concluded that the matter should be sent back to the Assessing Officer for a reassessment, emphasizing the importance of granting a personal hearing to the petitioner. The writ petitions were allowed, the assessment orders were set aside, and the Assessing Officer was directed to redo the assessment after providing the petitioner with an opportunity for a personal hearing within six weeks from the date of the order.

This judgment highlights the significance of procedural fairness in tax assessments, particularly when issues of liability are raised by the taxpayer. It underscores the principle that a taxpayer should be given a chance to present their case, especially when requesting a personal hearing to contest the basis of the assessment. The court's decision to set aside the assessment orders and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer emphasizes the importance of due process and the right to be heard in such proceedings. The directive for the reassessment to be conducted promptly within a specified timeframe further emphasizes the court's commitment to ensuring timely resolution of tax disputes while upholding the principles of natural justice.

---