Fair hearing requirement: adjudication set aside where the authority ignored the taxpayer's filed reply and ordered fresh consideration.

An adjudication order was set aside because the authority proceeded as if no reply had been filed, even though the petitioner had submitted a reply to the show-cause notice. The High Court treated the omission to consider the filed reply as a fairness defect in the decision-making process and accepted the respondent's statement that the reply would be reconsidered. Fresh consideration was therefore directed after granting the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order was liable to be set aside for having proceeded on the footing that no reply had been filed despite the petitioner's reply to the show cause notice, and whether the matter required fresh consideration after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

Analysis: The order was challenged on the limited ground that the authority ignored the petitioner's reply dated 17.08.2024 to the show cause notice dated 20.05.2024. The Court noted that the respondent, on instructions, accepted that the reply would be considered afresh and that the petitioner would be heard again. Since the impugned order had been passed without taking the filed reply into account, the defect affected the fairness of the adjudication and called for a fresh decision after due hearing.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the respondent was directed to consider the petitioner's reply and pass fresh orders after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

---