Fair hearing and notice consistency required before tax reassessment orders; orders set aside and remitted for reconsideration.

Assessment orders were challenged as having proceeded on grounds different from the show cause notice and without proper consideration of the taxpayer's objections. The notice had proposed revision on the alleged higher tax rate and possible application of section 27 if branch-wise details were not produced, but the orders did not address the specific contention that the lodging facility was run by a different entity. The absence of personal hearing and failure to examine the materials furnished rendered the decision-making process unfair, and the advance ruling referred to in the order was also required to be considered. The orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration after hearing the taxpayer.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned assessment orders were liable to be set aside for having proceeded on grounds different from the show cause notice and for want of proper consideration and personal hearing.

Analysis: The notices proposed revision on a stated basis, namely the alleged liability to tax at a higher rate and the possible application of section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act if branch-wise details were not produced. The objections specifically asserted that the lodging facility was run by a different entity. The assessment orders, however, were passed on a different line without adverting to the materials furnished by the petitioner. The absence of personal hearing and the failure to properly examine the specific contention raised by the petitioner amounted to unfairness in the decision-making process. The Assessing Officer was also required to take note of the advance ruling referred to in the order.

Conclusion: The assessment orders were unsustainable and were set aside, with the matter remanded for fresh consideration after affording personal hearing to the petitioner.

---