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>Assessment Order Quashed Due to Lack of Personal Hearing; Case Remanded for Reconsideration Under TN VAT Act.</h1> <h3>Hotel Theni International Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Commercial Tax Department Theni-II</h3> Hotel Theni International Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT) Commercial Tax Department Theni-II - TMI Issues involved:Challenge to assessment order under TN VAT Act for the year 2014-15 based on lack of personal hearing and violation of principles of natural justice.Analysis:The petitioner challenged the assessment order dated 09.11.2016 under the TN VAT Act for the year 2014-15. The petitioner contended that the Tamil Nadu Government amended Entries 1 and 2 of the second schedule to the TN VAT Act, which was upheld by the High Court and Division Bench. Special Leave Petitions were filed against this decision, including by the petitioner. The petitioner, in response to a pre-revision notice, highlighted the pending challenge before the Supreme Court but did not provide a detailed explanation on the merits of the case. The impugned assessment order assessed tax and penalty against the petitioner. The petitioner argued that no personal hearing was granted, and the respondent failed to provide an opportunity to raise objections as per the principles of natural justice.The respondent argued that the petitioner could have utilized an alternate remedy under Section 51 of the TN VAT Act before approaching the High Court directly. The Court noted that the petitioner was not afforded a personal hearing, and no detailed explanation was provided in response to the pre-revision notice. The petitioner's reply mentioned the pending Special Leave Petitions challenging the amendment, but did not address the merits of the case. The Court agreed that the respondent violated the principles of natural justice by not granting adequate opportunity to the petitioner.The assessment order imposed a significant tax amount and penalty on the petitioner. The Court, after considering the lack of personal hearing, failure to provide an opportunity to raise objections, and the substantial tax and penalty amounts, concluded that the impugned order needed to be quashed. The Court remanded the matter back to the respondent for fresh consideration, directing them to allow the petitioner to raise all objections within eight weeks. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
TaxTMI 