Court remands matter for fresh consideration, sets aside assessment order, directs reevaluation, and requires cooperation.

The Court remanded the matter for fresh consideration, setting aside the impugned assessment order and directing the respondent to reevaluate the case. The petitioner was instructed to submit objections, attend a personal hearing, and cooperate in the inquiry. The respondent was required to pass appropriate orders based on merits within four weeks after the hearing. Failure to cooperate would be noted. The writ petition was allowed without costs, and the related miscellaneous petition was closed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging revised assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18 passed before the expiry of the assessment year without completing the original order of assessment under Section 22 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. Lack of opportunity of personal hearing before passing the impugned order.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a dealer in ceramic tiles, challenged a revised assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18 passed by the respondent before the expiry of the assessment year without completing the original assessment order as required by Section 22 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The petitioner contended that they were not provided with an opportunity of personal hearing before the impugned order was passed, citing a notice received on 06.03.2018 and the ill health condition of the sole proprietor hindering an immediate response. The petitioner sought relief through the writ petition.

The respondent, represented by the learned Additional Government Pleader, argued that the petitioner was issued a show cause notice on 06.03.2018 but failed to respond, leading to the passing of the impugned order on 28.03.2018. It was emphasized that the impugned order was appealable, and the petitioner should have pursued an appeal instead of resorting to a writ petition. The respondent sought dismissal of the writ petition.

Upon hearing both parties, the Court noted that the petitioner did receive the show cause notice but did not file objections. The Court highlighted that it is mandatory for the respondent to provide an opportunity for personal hearing, as per the circular issued by the Head of the Department, even if not requested by the petitioner. The Court observed a lack of mention regarding personal hearing in the impugned order, contravening the established practice.

Citing a relevant unreported decision of a Division Bench, the Court emphasized that failure to submit objections to a pre-assessment notice does not justify denying the assessee an opportunity for personal hearing. Consequently, the Court decided to remand the matter for fresh consideration, setting aside the impugned order and directing the respondent to reevaluate the case.

The Court directed the petitioner to submit objections within two weeks of receiving the order, following which the respondent must schedule a specific date for a hearing within two weeks and communicate it to the petitioner in advance. The petitioner was instructed to appear before the respondent, present their contentions, and cooperate in the enquiry. The respondent was mandated to pass appropriate orders purely on merits within four weeks after the hearing, with a warning that non-cooperation from the petitioner would be duly recorded.

Ultimately, the writ petition was allowed, and no costs were imposed. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed as a consequence of the judgment.

---