Assessment Orders Overturned for Natural Justice Violation; Court Demands Fresh Review with Personal Hearing for Sole Proprietor.

The HC set aside the impugned assessment orders against the petitioner, a sole proprietor, due to a violation of Natural Justice Principles (NJP) by the Assessing Authority, which failed to provide a personal hearing. Despite the availability of an alternate remedy, the court exercised writ jurisdiction, citing exceptions for NJP violations. The matter was remanded for fresh assessment, mandating adherence to NJP and previous legal precedents. The court directed the third respondent to conduct a new assessment within a specified timeframe, ensuring the petitioner receives a personal hearing, thus rectifying procedural irregularities in the assessment process.

---

---

Issues involved: Violation of Natural Justice Principles in assessment orders

Analysis:

Issue 1: Violation of Natural Justice Principles in assessment orders

The petitioner, a sole proprietor conducting business as 'Ezeekart Retail,' was subjected to an inspection by Enforcement Wing Officers, leading to the issuance of a 'Revision Notice' highlighting discrepancies and proposing assessment revision and penalty under the TNVAT Act. Despite the petitioner's objections and request for a personal hearing, the Assessing Authority proceeded without granting a personal hearing, resulting in the passing of impugned assessment orders for three different assessment years. The impugned orders failed to consider the petitioner's objections or provide a personal hearing, leading to a clear violation of Natural Justice Principles (NJP).

In light of the undisputed violation of NJP, the court considered the availability of an alternate remedy through an appeal to the Deputy Commissioner but highlighted exceptions where writ jurisdiction can be exercised despite an alternate remedy. Citing legal precedents such as the K.C.Mathew case and Satyawati Tandon case, the court emphasized that lack of jurisdiction, violation of NJP, and ineffective or non-efficacious alternate remedies constitute exceptions to the rule requiring exhaustion of alternate remedies before resorting to writ jurisdiction.

Given the violation of NJP and the specific circumstances of the case, the court deemed it unnecessary to relegate the petitioner to the appeal remedy and instead set aside the impugned orders. The matter was remanded to the third respondent for fresh assessment in accordance with the law, emphasizing the importance of adhering to principles established in previous court judgments, such as Narasus Roller Flour Mill's case. The court directed the third respondent to conduct the assessment afresh within a specified timeframe and grant the petitioner a personal hearing as requested.

The court's decision to allow and dispose of all three writ petitions with specific directions to ensure compliance with Natural Justice Principles and established legal principles demonstrates a thorough consideration of the violation in the assessment process and the appropriate remedy to rectify the procedural irregularities.

---