Procedural Fairness Prevails: Assessment Order Quashed for Failing to Grant Proper Hearing and Consider Submitted Evidence

HC found the assessment order invalid due to breach of natural justice. The respondent failed to consider the petitioner's reply and supporting documents, and did not provide a personal hearing as mandated by statutory provisions. HC set aside the order, directing the respondent to reconsider the matter, provide a personal hearing, and issue a fresh order within two months.

---

---

Issues: Challenge to assessment order based on breach of natural justice principles

Analysis:
The judgment revolves around a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 22.09.2023 on the grounds of breach of principles of natural justice. The petitioner had responded to a show cause notice dated 04.03.2023 by submitting various documents, including bank reconciliation statements and a Chartered Accountant's Certificate, on 22.08.2023. However, the impugned order was issued without taking into account the petitioner's reply and the annexed documents. The petitioner's counsel argued that the lack of consideration of the reply and the absence of a personal hearing violated the provisions of sub-section 4 of Section 75 of the relevant GST enactments.

The Government Advocate representing the respondent contended that three reminders were issued post the show cause notice, indicating compliance with principles of natural justice. However, upon examining the impugned order, it was evident that all three reminders were issued before the petitioner's reply on 22.08.2023. The respondent had failed to adequately examine the petitioner's reply and the attached documents in the impugned order. Moreover, the absence of a personal hearing further violated the statutory requirement under sub-section 4 of Section 75 of the applicable GST enactments. Consequently, the court held the impugned order as unsustainable.

As a result of the above findings, the High Court set aside the impugned order dated 22.09.2023 and remanded the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration. The respondent was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including a personal hearing, and issue a fresh order within two months from the date of receipt of the court's order. The writ petition was thus disposed of with no costs imposed on either party.

---