Court Invalidates Assessment Order for Lack of Notice, Petitioner Granted Chance to Contest

The Court set aside the Best Judgment Assessment Order and Demand Notice due to lack of proper notice to the petitioner, remitting the matter for reconsideration. The petitioner was directed to deposit 20% of the demand within two weeks and inform authorities by email, allowing an opportunity to contest the assessment. Compliance with procedural requirements and ensuring a fair opportunity to contest assessments were highlighted by the Court in disposing of the writ petition.

---

---

Issues:
1. Validity of Best Judgment Assessment Order and Demand Notice.
2. Notice of proposed assessment proceedings.
3. Violation of principles of natural justice.
4. Opportunity to appear before the assessing officer.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged the Best Judgment Assessment Order and Demand Notice, claiming lack of notice of proposed assessment proceedings. The petitioner argued that without proper notice, they could not furnish details, seeking to quash the assessment order and demand.

2. The respondents contended that the impugned order was appealable, and a stay request required a 20% deposit of the amount due. They argued that notice was sent to the petitioner's provided email, and failure to respond precluded claiming a violation of natural justice to avoid the deposit.

3. In response, the petitioner's counsel stated that no notice was received on the registered email provided. The petitioner expressed willingness to deposit 20% of the demanded amount but insisted on the right to appear before the assessing officer to contest the Best Judgment Assessment.

4. The Court, considering the submissions and the absence of notice to the petitioner's email, set aside the Assessment Order and Demand Notice. The matter was remitted for reconsideration, with a condition that the petitioner must deposit 20% of the demand within two weeks and inform the authorities by email. Upon deposit and notification, the assessing authority would grant an opportunity to the petitioner to present their case. If successful, the deposited amount would be refunded.

In conclusion, the Court disposed of the writ petition, emphasizing the importance of providing a fair opportunity to contest assessments and ensuring compliance with procedural requirements.

---