Deviation proposal and procedural fairness justify fresh hearing before de novo revisional assessment in tax proceedings

Where a deviation proposal had been sent by the predecessor officer but was not reflected in the assessment orders, fairness justified treating the impugned orders as further revisional notices and granting a fresh personal hearing. The authority was required to reconsider the assessee's objections de novo and pass fresh orders after hearing. The text emphasises that, on these facts, procedural fairness could require reopening the matter for revisional assessment, even though the merits of the tax liability were not adjudicated in the excerpt.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned assessment orders should be treated as revisional notices and whether the assessee was entitled to a fresh personal hearing and reconsideration in the light of the deviation proposal sent by the predecessor officer.

Analysis: The core controversy was whether a deviation proposal had been sent by the predecessor of the officer who passed the assessment orders. The files disclosed that such a proposal had in fact been sent. As the impugned orders did not refer to that deviation proposal, and having regard to the peculiar facts of the case, the matter called for a fresh opportunity of hearing. The orders were therefore not interfered with on merits, but were given the character of further revisional notices to enable a de novo revisional assessment. The assessee was directed to pay 15% of the disputed tax and thereafter be afforded personal hearing, after which the authority was to reconsider the objections and pass fresh orders.

Conclusion: The assessee succeeded in securing a fresh hearing and de novo reconsideration, but the assessment orders were not set aside.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions were disposed of by granting procedural relief that enabled reconsideration of the assessments after personal hearing, without adjudicating the merits of the tax liability.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a deviation proposal exists and is not reflected in the assessment order, fairness may justify treating the order as a further notice and directing de novo assessment after personal hearing.

---