Opportunity in assessment and disputed attachment objections require fresh assessment and consideration by the competent authority

An assessment completed without an effective opportunity to produce books and documents was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration on merits after giving the assessees a chance to place their materials before the Assessing Officer. The challenge to the property attachment was not entertained in writ proceedings because the objection involved disputed factual questions; the assessees were directed to raise their representation before the competent authority for enquiry and appropriate orders. The writ petitions were disposed of by preserving the attachment pending that consideration.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the demand notices issued for recovery of sales tax arrears for the relevant assessment year were liable to be set aside and the assessment remitted for fresh consideration after granting an opportunity to the petitioners. (ii) Whether the order of attachment of the property could be interfered with in writ proceedings or the petitioners should be permitted to raise their objection before the competent authority.

Issue (i): Whether the demand notices issued for recovery of sales tax arrears for the relevant assessment year were liable to be set aside and the assessment remitted for fresh consideration after granting an opportunity to the petitioners.

Analysis: The petitioners complained that the assessment had been completed without giving them an effective opportunity to produce books of account and other documents. The Court accepted that the petitioners should be given a chance to place their materials before the Assessing Officer so that the assessment for the relevant year could be completed on merits.

Conclusion: The demand notices were set aside for the present and the matter was remanded for fresh assessment after affording opportunity to the petitioners.

Issue (ii): Whether the order of attachment of the property could be interfered with in writ proceedings or the petitioners should be permitted to raise their objection before the competent authority.

Analysis: The challenge to the attachment turned on the petitioners' claim that the property was not liable to attachment, which involved disputed factual questions. The Court held that such an objection should first be placed before the Assessing Officer or competent authority for enquiry and consideration.

Conclusion: The attachment order was not interfered with, and the petitioners were directed to make a representation before the competent authority for appropriate orders.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions were disposed of by granting the petitioners an opportunity in respect of the reassessment and attachment issues, while preserving the attachment pending consideration by the competent authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an assessee alleges want of opportunity in assessment and the dispute on attachment involves factual controversy, the proper course is to remit the assessment for fresh consideration and require the parties to pursue the factual objection before the competent authority.

---