Court sets aside assessment orders for violating natural justice principles, remits matter for reassessment

The court allowed the writ petitions challenging assessment orders for assessment years 2012-13 to 2016-17 due to violation of natural justice principles. The court set aside the impugned orders and remitted the matter to the Assessing Officer for reassessment. The Assessing Officer was directed to redo the assessment after receiving the petitioner's reply within four weeks, ensuring compliance with the law. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging assessment orders for assessment years 2012-13 to 2016-17 based on violation of natural justice principles.

Analysis:
The petitioner contended that the assessment orders were passed without giving them sufficient opportunity to respond to the notices of proposals. The petitioner requested time to file objections through letters dated 15.03.2019, indicating the need for additional data and GSTR2A reconciliation. These letters were acknowledged by the Assessing Officer on 20.03.2019 but the assessment orders were passed on 29.03.2019, stating that no objections were filed despite sufficient time given. The court noted that the Assessing Officer proceeded without informing the petitioner about the acceptance or rejection of their request for time, which violated principles of natural justice.

The court emphasized that the Assessing Officer should have communicated the decision on the petitioner's request for time to submit objections. The lack of communication created a presumption for the petitioner that their request was accepted. As the assessment orders were passed merely by confirming the proposals in the absence of objections, the court concluded that the matter should be sent back to the Assessing Officer for reassessment based on merits and in accordance with the law after obtaining objections from the petitioner.

Accordingly, the writ petitions were allowed, the impugned orders were set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer for reassessment. The Assessing Officer was directed to redo the assessment after receiving the petitioner's reply within four weeks from the date of the court's order. The reassessment was to be done on merits and in compliance with the law. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---