Japanese Company Challenges Assessment Order for Violating Natural Justice Principles

The petitioner, a company incorporated in Japan, challenged an assessment order passed by respondent No.4, alleging disregard of submitted documents and violation of natural justice principles. Seeking writs under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner requested the court to quash the assessment order and remand the matter for reconsideration. Despite objections on maintainability due to alternative remedies, the court issued notice and instructed no coercive actions on the assessment order until the returnable date. The case emphasizes the importance of considering legal principles and submitted documents in tax assessment matters.

---

---

Issues:
1. Assessment order passed disregarding documents and principles of natural justice.
2. Petitioner seeking writs under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
3. Objections raised on the maintainability of the petition due to the availability of alternative remedy.
4. Argument of breach of natural justice principles and non-consideration of documents.
5. Request for remanding the matter to the concerned authority without delving into the merits.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a company incorporated in Japan with a project office in India engaged in manufacturing heavy machinery and technology products, challenged the assessment order dated 23.03.2020 passed by respondent No.4. The petitioner alleged that the assessment disregarded submitted documents and violated principles of natural justice. Seeking writs under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner requested the court to quash the assessment order and direct the respondents to withdraw it. The petitioner also sought interim reliefs and costs of the petition, emphasizing non-consideration of documents and binding decisions leading to heavy tax liabilities.

Serious objections were raised regarding the maintainability of the petition due to the availability of alternative remedies. The petitioner argued that the breach of natural justice principles and non-consideration of documents outweighed the availability of alternative remedies. The petitioner urged the court to remand the matter to the concerned authority for considering the well-established legal principles and the plethora of documents submitted by the parties. Notice was issued returnable on 27.07.2020, with the Assistant Public Prosecutor waiving service for the respondent-State. Instructions were given to refrain from coercive actions related to the assessment order until the returnable date, highlighting the seriousness of the issues raised in the petition and the need for a thorough examination of the legal and factual aspects involved.

---