Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the ex parte reassessment order passed under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 was liable to be set aside for violation of the principles of natural justice and for being a non-speaking order.
Analysis: The challenge was confined to denial of effective hearing in reassessment proceedings. The record showed that the petitioner sought time to file a reply to the reassessment notice, but the request was rejected because the proceedings were nearing limitation. The reassessment order was passed ex parte without considering the petitioner's objections already placed before the sanctioning authority and without recording any independent reasons on the entitlement to input tax credit. The order therefore did not reflect application of mind to the objections raised and amounted to a summary reiteration of the reopening material rather than a reasoned adjudication.
Conclusion: The ex parte reassessment order was unsustainable and was set aside as violative of natural justice and as a non-speaking order. The matter was remanded to the assessing authority for fresh consideration after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.
Ratio Decidendi: A reassessment order passed without adequate opportunity of hearing and without dealing with the assessee's objections on merits is liable to be set aside for breach of natural justice and want of reasons.