Court Orders Complete Statements, Cross-Examination for Fair Process; Deadline Set for 05/31/23. No Costs Imposed.

The HC disposed of the writ petitions, directing the respondent to furnish the complete statements and permit cross-examination, ensuring compliance with natural justice principles. The assessments must be concluded by 31.05.2023. The court rejected the respondent's timing objection and imposed no costs, closing all related miscellaneous petitions.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Request for documents and opportunity to cross-examine.
2. Relevance and necessity of providing full statements.
3. Adherence to principles of natural justice and disclosure obligations.

Summary:

1. Request for Documents and Opportunity to Cross-Examine:

The petitioner sought a mandamus directing the respondent to dispose of a request dated 20.03.2023 for various documents and an opportunity to cross-examine Mr. Rajendra Kothari and Mr. Suresh Khatri. The court noted that the petitioners had received some requested materials but disputed whether the entirety of the statements had been supplied. The court emphasized that all statements recorded from the two individuals must be supplied in full to the petitioner.

2. Relevance and Necessity of Providing Full Statements:

The court referenced Supreme Court judgments in T.Takano v Securities And Exchange Board of India and Reliance Industries Limited v Securities and Exchange Board of India, which underscored the necessity of disclosing all relevant material for adjudication. The principles established include the duty of a quasi-judicial authority to disclose relied-upon material and the irrelevance of the authority's assertion that certain materials are not relied upon if they are relevant to the action taken. The court concluded that selective disclosure is unfair and that the petitioner must know the entire context of the statements, which might support their defense.

3. Adherence to Principles of Natural Justice and Disclosure Obligations:

The court stressed that assessments must adhere to the principles of natural justice. The petitioner's status as a third party to the search assessment under Section 153C necessitates the provision of all allegedly incriminating materials found during the search. The court rejected the respondent's argument that the petitioner approached the court at the eleventh hour, noting that the show-cause notices were issued only on 11.03.2023, and the request for statements was made on 20.03.2023. The court ordered that the statements be handed over within one week and allowed an opportunity for cross-examination, with assessments to be completed by 31.05.2023.

Conclusion:

The writ petitions were disposed of with the court directing the respondent to provide the entirety of the statements and allow cross-examination, ensuring the assessments are completed by the specified deadline. No costs were imposed, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

---