Court overturns assessment orders for hotel, mandates fair hearing in tax assessment process.

The Court set aside assessment orders Exts.P12 and P13 issued without affording the petitioner, a Hotel, an opportunity to be heard. A fresh assessment was directed to be conducted by the State Tax Officer within two months, ensuring the petitioner's authorized representative is given a fair hearing. The judgment aimed to uphold principles of natural justice and procedural fairness in tax assessments.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Impugning assessment orders issued without affording an opportunity of being heard.
2. Validity of assessment orders Exts.P12 and P13.
3. Whether assessment orders can be set aside.
4. Possibility of allowing a fresh assessment with an opportunity to be heard.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a Hotel, challenged assessment orders Exts.P12 and P13 issued by the State Tax Officer without being heard. The petitioner's counsel argued that the orders were issued without offering a hearing, despite the returns being filed. On the other hand, the Government Pleader acknowledged the lack of hearing but defended the validity of the orders, stating that proper assessment was conducted. The Court noted that the petitioner was not heard, as evident from the orders, and deemed it necessary to provide an opportunity for a fair hearing before allowing the assessments to stand. Consequently, the Court set aside Exts.P12 and P13, not on a negative finding but to facilitate a fresh assessment by the State Tax Officer after affording the petitioner a proper hearing.

The Court directed the State Tax Officer to conduct a fresh assessment promptly, ensuring the petitioner's authorized representative is heard either physically or through video conferencing. The fresh assessment was mandated to be completed within two months from the date of the judgment. To facilitate compliance, the petitioner was instructed to appear before the State Tax Officer's office on a specified date for a hearing or to schedule a suitable hearing date. The judgment aimed to uphold principles of natural justice by providing the petitioner with a fair opportunity to present their case before a revised assessment is made.

In conclusion, the Court's decision emphasized the importance of granting a fair hearing before issuing assessment orders. By setting aside the original orders and mandating a fresh assessment with proper hearing procedures, the judgment sought to ensure procedural fairness and adherence to legal principles in tax assessments.

---