Court sets aside assessment order for 2011-12, stresses independent assessment by Assessing Officer. Petitioner to submit objections, respondent to reconsider.

The High Court set aside the challenged revised assessment order for the assessment year 2011-12, emphasizing the importance of independent assessment by the Assessing Officer. The court found that the order was hastily issued without proper review of the petitioner's objections and directed the respondent to reconsider the matter. The petitioner was given 15 days to submit objections, and the respondent was instructed to conduct a personal hearing and provide reasoned orders within two weeks. Failure to cooperate would result in appropriate action. The writ petition was disposed of without costs.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to revised assessment order for the assessment year 2011-12.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, challenged a revised assessment order dated 27.03.2018. The respondent issued a show cause notice based on an inspection, and the petitioner sought time to file objections. Despite the petitioner's accountant requesting an extension till 15.04.2018, the respondent passed the impugned order without due consideration. The petitioner contended that the order was hastily issued without proper review of their representation.

The High Court noted that the respondent failed to consider the petitioner's request for an extension before passing the order. The impugned order merely confirmed the proposal without independent assessment, citing the dealer's failure to attend a hearing as the basis for confirmation. The court highlighted the importance of the Assessing Officer's independent judgment in completing assessments, as established in previous judgments.

Referring to past decisions, the court emphasized the Assessing Officer's duty to independently evaluate information and provide reasoned orders. The court found that the impugned order did not adhere to these principles, warranting its setting aside. Consequently, the court remanded the matter back to the respondent, directing the petitioner to submit objections within 15 days. The respondent was instructed to conduct a personal hearing, issue reasoned orders within two weeks, and warned of taking appropriate action if the petitioner failed to cooperate.

In conclusion, the High Court set aside the impugned order and provided clear instructions for further proceedings, emphasizing the need for independent assessment and adherence to legal principles. The writ petition was disposed of without costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

---