Natural justice and statutory appeal protection: assessment not set aside, but appellate remedy preserved with interim relief and delay consideration.

The Court declined to interfere with the assessment order on the ground of breach of natural justice because the record showed that adjournment was granted, no reply was filed, and no appearance was made on the hearing date; the statutory opportunity was treated as duly afforded. It also held that the later search proceedings did not excuse non-response to the show-cause notice. At the same time, to preserve the appellate remedy, the Court permitted the petitioner to file the statutory appeal within time, directed independent consideration of delay and pre-deposit by the appellate authority, and kept coercive recovery in abeyance with permission to operate the bank account until the appeal was decided.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned assessment order warranted interference on the ground of breach of natural justice, and whether the petitioner should be permitted to pursue the statutory appeal with interim protection.

Analysis: The petitioner had sought adjournment and the time was extended, but the record showed that no reply was filed and no appearance was made on the date granted for hearing. The Court found that the opportunity contemplated under the statutory scheme had been afforded and that the subsequent search proceedings did not absolve the petitioner from pursuing the show-cause notice. The Court declined to interfere with the assessment on merits, but took note of the petitioner's desire to avail the appellate remedy and considered the delay in approaching the appellate authority in the facts of the case. To preserve the right of appeal, the Court directed that the petitioner may file the appeal within the stipulated time and that the authority shall decide it independently, uninfluenced by observations in the order. Pending such decision, coercive recovery was kept in abeyance and the petitioner was allowed to operate the bank account, subject to the statutory pre-deposit issue being considered by the appellate authority.

Conclusion: The Court refused to set aside the assessment order for want of hearing, but granted the petitioner liberty to prefer the statutory appeal with consequential interim protection and consideration of delay.

---