2021 (4) TMI 468 - HC - GST

Court sets aside Assessment Order for lack of natural justice, directs fresh assessment with personal hearing.

The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the Assessment Order due to the violation of principles of natural justice for not affording the ... Violation of principles of natural justice - no personal hearing was accorded to the petitioner before passing the impugned order - HELD THAT:- The petitioner was not afforded a reasonable opportunity, this Court is of the considered view that the matter needs to be remitted back to the 1st respondent. The matter is remanded to 1st respondent with a direction to afford personal hearing to the petitioner wherein the petitioner is entitled to take the relevant pleas which are permissible to him under law - Petition allowed by way of remand. Issues: Violation of principles of natural justice in passing an Assessment Order without affording personal hearing to the petitioner.In this case, the petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus challenging the Assessment Order passed by the 1st respondent for the tax periods 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20, along with the issuance of Garnishee Notices to other respondents under Sections 79(1)(c) of the GST Acts. The petitioner contended that the impugned order was illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction due to the lack of personal hearing before its issuance. The main argument presented was the gross violation of principles of natural justice, emphasizing the absence of a personal hearing as a significant ground for setting aside the order. The petitioner requested the Court to quash the order and direct the 1st respondent to conduct a fresh assessment after affording a personal hearing.During the proceedings, the learned counsel for the petitioner, G. Narendra Chetty, highlighted the absence of a reasonable opportunity for personal hearing as the primary issue. On the other hand, the Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes chose not to contest the matter, leaving the decision to the Court's discretion. The Court, after considering the arguments, concluded that the petitioner was indeed not provided with a fair opportunity for a personal hearing, leading to the decision to remit the matter back to the 1st respondent for proper adjudication.Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned Assessment Order and remanding the case to the 1st respondent. The Court directed the 1st respondent to afford the petitioner a personal hearing, enabling the petitioner to present all relevant arguments permitted by law. The fresh Assessment Order was to be passed promptly and in compliance with legal requirements. The judgment also specified that no costs were to be imposed, and any pending Interlocutory Applications were to be closed in light of the decision.