Court allows writ petitions challenging assessment orders for 2013-2014 & 2014-2015, remits for fresh assessment.

The court allowed the writ petitions challenging revised assessment orders for the assessment years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015. The court set aside the impugned orders and remitted the matter back to the respondent for fresh assessment orders. The court directed the respondent to provide a personal hearing to the petitioner within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging revised assessment orders for assessment years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015.
Validity of revising assessment due to exceeding turnover ceiling.
Imposition of penalty under Section 27(3)(c) of the TNVAT Act without providing a personal hearing.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the revised assessment orders for the assessment years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, arguing that the respondent had no right to revise the assessment as the deemed assessment had already taken place when the turnover did not exceed Rs. 50 Lakhs. The petitioner contended that the imposition of penalty under Section 27(3)(c) of the TNVAT Act, 2006, without a personal hearing, was erroneous. The respondent issued notices proposing to revise the assessment, claiming that the petitioner had crossed the turnover ceiling in those assessment years as well. The respondent called for objections and indicated the levy of penalty under Section 22(5) of the TNVAT Act. The petitioner objected to the proposal, but the impugned orders confirmed the proposal and imposed a penalty at 150%.

The learned Government Advocate for the respondent argued that the revised assessment was made after considering the objections raised by the petitioner. However, the court noted that the imposition of penalty under Section 27(3)(c) of the TNVAT Act was not adequately explained. The court observed that the petitioner was not provided with a personal hearing despite the notice indicating the right to one within 15 days. The court concluded that the matter needed to be remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration, emphasizing the importance of providing a due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

In the final judgment, the court allowed the writ petitions, setting aside the impugned orders and remitting the matter back to the respondent for fresh assessment orders. The court directed the respondent to provide a personal hearing to the petitioner within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---