2024 (10) TMI 1592 - HC - GST

Procedural Fairness Prevails: Assessment Order Quashed Due to Denied Personal Hearing, Opportunity Granted for Reconsideration

HC Madras quashed the assessment order due to lack of personal hearing after the petitioner's reply. The case was remanded for reconsideration, granting ... Subsection (4) of Section 75 (mandatory personal hearing requirement) - personal hearing - assessment vitiated for failure to comply with mandatory hearing - reasonable opportunity of hearing - remand for fresh considerationSubsection (4) of Section 75 (mandatory personal hearing requirement) - personal hearing - assessment vitiated for failure to comply with mandatory hearing - Failure to offer a personal hearing after receipt of the assessee's reply vitiates the assessment order under subsection (4) of Section 75. - HELD THAT: - The Court found that the petitioner's reply dated 20.06.2023 was on the record and was referred to in the impugned assessment order. Subsection (4) of Section 75 imposes a mandatory requirement of affording a personal hearing either when requested or where an order adverse to the taxpayer is proposed. Notwithstanding opportunities earlier afforded by intimation or show cause notice, the absence of a personal hearing after the petitioner filed its reply rendered the assessment order vitiated. The Court noted that the petitioner had not been entirely diligent in responding earlier, but held that the statutory mandate nonetheless required compliance and failure to do so warranted interference.Impugned assessment order set aside on account of failure to comply with the mandatory personal hearing requirement.Remand for fresh consideration - reasonable opportunity of hearing - personal hearing - Appropriate remedy is remand for reconsideration with directions permitting submission of documents and holding of a personal hearing, followed by a fresh assessment within stipulated time. - HELD THAT: - The Court remanded the matter for fresh consideration, permitting the petitioner to furnish any supporting documents within two weeks of receiving the order. The assessing officer was directed, upon receipt of the petitioner's reply, to provide a reasonable opportunity for the petitioner to be heard, explicitly including a personal hearing, and thereafter to pass a fresh assessment order. A two-month time limit from receipt of the petitioner's reply was prescribed for completion of the fresh assessment. These directions were issued to cure the procedural infirmity while enabling adjudication on merits.Matter remanded; petitioner allowed two weeks to submit documents; assessing officer to provide personal hearing and issue fresh assessment within two months of receipt of petitioner's reply.Final Conclusion: The assessment order dated 09.10.2023 is quashed for non-compliance with the mandatory personal hearing requirement under subsection (4) of Section 75; the matter is remanded for reconsideration with directions permitting the petitioner to file documents within two weeks and requiring the assessing officer to afford a reasonable opportunity including a personal hearing and to pass a fresh assessment order within two months of receipt of the petitioner's reply. The High Court of Madras quashed the assessment order dated 09.10.2023 as personal hearing was not offered to the petitioner after their reply. The matter is remanded for reconsideration, allowing the petitioner to submit documents within two weeks for a fresh assessment order within two months. Case W.P.No.6870 of 2024 is disposed of with no costs.