Reasonable likelihood of bias vitiates reassessment where the same officer earlier investigated and later assessed the dealer.

An assessing officer who had earlier detected the alleged turnover mismatch and excess input tax credit claim, and who later acted as the assessing authority, could not lawfully complete the same dealer's assessment where prior involvement created a reasonable likelihood of bias. The rule against a person being a judge in his own cause applies to quasi-judicial and administrative proceedings, and the assessment failed the requirement that justice must be seen to be done. The assessment order and consequential demand notice were therefore quashed for breach of natural justice, and the matter was remitted for fresh reassessment by a competent authority after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessing authority, having earlier detected the alleged discrepancy and recommended further investigation, could thereafter lawfully assess the same dealer under Section 43 of the Odisha Value Added Tax Act, 2004.

Analysis: The authority which initiated the enquiry had already formed and communicated a prima facie view on the mismatch in turnover and excess claim of input tax credit, and the same officer thereafter functioned as the assessing authority. In such circumstances, the possibility of bias could not be ruled out. The settled rule that no person should be a judge in his own cause applies to quasi-judicial and administrative proceedings alike, and an assessment made by an officer so involved does not satisfy the requirement that justice must be seen to be done.

Conclusion: The assessment order and consequential demand notice were vitiated for breach of natural justice and were liable to be quashed. The matter was directed to be reassessed by a competent authority after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: An assessing officer who has earlier ed or materially participated in the enquiry leading to the assessment cannot subsequently assess the same dealer where such prior involvement gives rise to a reasonable likelihood of bias.

---