Court sets aside exparte reassessment order for violating natural justice, remands case for reconsideration.

The court set aside the exparte reassessment order, deeming it a violation of natural justice principles and lacking sufficient reasoning. The case was remanded to the respondent for reconsideration from the stage of the reassessment notice, with the petitioner instructed to reply by a specified date. The respondent was directed to conduct a personal hearing and issue a reasoned order within two weeks. The court clarified that the reassessment proceedings would not be time-barred and emphasized independent consideration of objections.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Violation of principles of natural justice.
2. Legitimacy of reassessment proceedings.
3. Adequacy of reasoning in the exparte reassessment order.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The petitioner argued that the exparte reassessment order dated 30.03.2022 was passed without adequate opportunity to present their case, thus violating the principles of natural justice. The court noted that the reassessment notice dated 10.03.2022 was issued in haste to conclude proceedings before the financial year ended on 31.03.2022. The petitioner sought a 7-day adjournment on 25.03.2022, which was denied by the respondent No.2, citing the impending limitation period. The court found that the reassessment order did not consider the petitioner's detailed reply dated 08.03.2022, making the opportunity of hearing an "empty formality." The court concluded that the reassessment order was passed with a predetermined mind and lacked adequate reasoning, thus violating the principles of natural justice.

2. Legitimacy of Reassessment Proceedings:
The reassessment was initiated based on an SIB investigation report dated 17.06.2015, which was never served upon the petitioner. The petitioner argued that the reassessment proceedings were initiated solely to avoid the limitation period and were based on a change of opinion rather than new material evidence. The court observed that the reassessment notice and subsequent proceedings were conducted in a hurried manner, without granting the petitioner sufficient time to respond. The court found that the reassessment proceedings lacked proper consideration of the petitioner's objections and were initiated with a premeditated intent to fasten liability on the petitioner.

3. Adequacy of Reasoning in the Exparte Reassessment Order:
The court scrutinized the exparte reassessment order dated 30.03.2022 and found it devoid of reasoning. The order merely reiterated the statements made in the notice dated 02.03.2022 and the sanction order dated 08.03.2022, without addressing the petitioner's objections on merits. The court noted that the reassessment order did not provide any deliberation on the petitioner's entitlement to claim Input Tax Credit (ITC) for the work done by Azko Nobel as a job worker. The court concluded that the reassessment order was a non-speaking order and did not reflect the mind of the adjudicating authority.

Conclusion:
The court set aside the exparte reassessment order dated 30.03.2022, finding it violative of the principles of natural justice and lacking adequate reasoning. The matter was remanded to the respondent No.2 for reconsideration from the stage of the reassessment notice dated 10.03.2022. The petitioner was directed to submit a reply by 26.09.2022, and the respondent No.2 was instructed to provide a personal hearing and pass a reasoned and speaking order within two weeks. The court clarified that the reassessment proceedings would not be barred by limitation due to this order and directed the respondent No.2 to consider the objections independently.

---