Assessment order set aside for 2019-20 due to lack of hearing. Importance of natural justice highlighted.

The court set aside the assessment order for the assessment year 2019-20 due to a violation of natural justice as the petitioner was not granted a personal hearing despite submitting a detailed reply. The court emphasized the importance of granting a hearing when facts are disputed and directed the respondent to schedule a fresh date for a personal hearing and proceed with the assessment in compliance with the law. The writ petition was allowed, providing relief to the petitioner.

---

---

Issues involved:
Challenge to assessment order for assessment year 2019-20; Violation of natural justice in passing the assessment order without granting opportunity of hearing.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the assessment order dated 30.09.2021 for the assessment year 2019-20, alleging a violation of natural justice. The assessment proceedings were conducted by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. The petitioner received the first notice on 25.09.2021 calling for a response to the Draft Assessment order, with a response deadline of 27.09.2021. Despite submitting a reply through electronic mode on the due date, and requesting a personal hearing, the petitioner did not receive any further communication before being served with the assessment order on 30.09.2021. The court noted that the assessment order was passed without granting the petitioner an opportunity for a personal hearing, which was acknowledged by the respondent authorities. The court emphasized the importance of granting a hearing when facts are disputed, especially when the petitioner had submitted a detailed reply. The lack of opportunity for a hearing was deemed a violation of essential procedural compliance and natural justice.

The court refused the respondent's request for time to file a counter affidavit, as the facts were not in dispute. The court found that the issuance of the first notice and the acknowledgment of the request for a personal hearing were evident from the record. Despite any technical reasons, the court held that it was imperative for the respondents to grant the petitioner an opportunity for a personal hearing, especially considering the detailed response submitted by the petitioner. The court highlighted that once the petitioner's request for a personal hearing was acknowledged, there was no valid reason to deny such an opportunity. Consequently, the court set aside the impugned assessment order and directed the respondent to intimate a fresh date for a personal hearing to the petitioner and proceed with the assessment in accordance with the law. As a result, the writ petition was allowed, granting relief to the petitioner.

---