Natural justice requires personal hearing before adverse tax orders, and related bank attachment cannot survive annulment.

An adjudicatory order passed without granting personal hearing was treated as contrary to natural justice and set aside, with the matter remanded for fresh consideration on merits after the petitioner filed reply or objection and paid 10% of the disputed tax amount. Because the underlying order was annulled, the bank attachment and account freezing could not continue and were directed to be lifted, subject to proof of the required payment. The operative effect was that coercive recovery measures fell away, while the tax demand itself remained open for reconsideration.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the impugned order was liable to be set aside for want of opportunity of personal hearing and fresh consideration. (ii) Whether the bank attachment and freezing of the petitioner's account could continue after setting aside of the impugned order.

Issue (i): Whether the impugned order was liable to be set aside for want of opportunity of personal hearing and fresh consideration.

Analysis: The petitioner was not afforded a personal hearing before the impugned order was passed. The Court found that the order was therefore passed in breach of principles of natural justice and that the petitioner should be given an opportunity to place the case on merits. The matter was accordingly directed to be reconsidered afresh by the respondent.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration, subject to payment of 10% of the disputed tax amount and filing of reply/objection by the petitioner.

Issue (ii): Whether the bank attachment and freezing of the petitioner's account could continue after setting aside of the impugned order.

Analysis: Once the impugned order was set aside, the basis for continuation of the attachment no longer survived. The Court directed release of the attachment and de-freezing of the account upon proof of payment of 10% of the demand amount.

Conclusion: The bank attachment was lifted and the account was directed to be de-frozen.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent of remand and consequential relief against bank attachment, while preserving reconsideration of the tax demand on merits by the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi: An adjudicatory order passed without affording personal hearing is liable to be set aside for violation of natural justice, and consequential coercive measures cannot survive once the underlying order is annulled.

---