Court voids re-assessment order and demand notice, directs respondent to set aside and grant fair hearing.

The Court declared the re-assessment order and demand notice void due to lack of a fair hearing, directing the respondent to set aside the order and notice. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to file objections within two weeks. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to legal requirements and conducting proceedings expediently, ensuring the petitioner's right to respond to the tax liability proposal fairly.

---

---

Issues:
1. Reassessment order passed without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard.
2. Issuance of multiple revised proposition notices proposing different tax liabilities.
3. Validity of the re-assessment order based on the principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged the re-assessment order passed by respondent No.1 under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, alleging a lack of adequate opportunity to be heard. The respondent issued various proposition notices, leading to a final tax liability proposal of &8377; 1,00,43,88,891/-. The petitioner contended that the respondent did not allow sufficient time to respond to the revised notices, leading to the impugned re-assessment order dated 20.04.2019. The petitioner argued that the order was arbitrary and should be set aside due to the absence of a fair hearing.

2. The Court noted that the respondent's actions in issuing multiple revised proposition notices proposing varying tax liabilities and hastily passing the re-assessment order were not in line with established legal principles. The Court emphasized that a quasi-judicial authority must provide a reasonable opportunity to be heard before making decisions. The Court criticized the perfunctory nature of the respondent's actions, highlighting the need for a thoughtful consideration of the tax liability before issuing notices. The Court found fault with the respondent's approach and emphasized the importance of due process in such matters.

3. In the final judgment, the Court declared the re-assessment order and consequential demand notice as void due to the lack of a fair hearing. The Court directed the respondent to set aside the impugned order and notice, allowing the petitioner to file objections within two weeks of receiving a certified copy of the order. The Court stressed that future proceedings should adhere to legal requirements and be conducted in an expedited manner. The judgment concluded by disposing of the writ petition with these directions, ensuring the petitioner's right to a fair opportunity to respond to the tax liability proposal.

---