Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tax Assessment Orders Overturned Due to Lack of Personal Hearing; Case Remanded for Fresh Consideration Under Natural Justice Principles.

        Tvl. Metal Smith India Private Limited, Rep. by its Authorized Signatory Mr. Raju. S Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tamil Nadu

        Tvl. Metal Smith India Private Limited, Rep. by its Authorized Signatory Mr. Raju. S Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tamil Nadu - TMI ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

        The core legal issues considered in this judgment are:

        • Whether the assessment order dated 26.04.2024 and the subsequent rectification order dated 15.02.2025 were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.
        • Whether the petitioner was denied an opportunity for a personal hearing before the impugned orders were passed.
        • Whether the matter should be remanded back to the assessing authority for fresh consideration with an opportunity for the petitioner to present their case.

        ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

        Violation of Principles of Natural Justice

        • Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The principles of natural justice require that a party affected by a decision must be given a fair opportunity to present their case. This includes the right to a personal hearing before any adverse order is passed.
        • Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court noted that the impugned assessment order was passed without granting the petitioner a personal hearing, despite their request for the same. The Court emphasized that failure to provide a personal hearing constitutes a violation of natural justice principles.
        • Key Evidence and Findings: The petitioner had submitted replies to the ASMT 10 notices and requested adjournments for filing a detailed reply and for a personal hearing. However, the respondent proceeded to pass the assessment order without considering these requests.
        • Application of Law to Facts: The Court applied the principles of natural justice to the facts of the case, concluding that the respondent's actions deprived the petitioner of a fair opportunity to present their case.
        • Treatment of Competing Arguments: The respondent argued that one issue was dropped based on the petitioner's reply, and the other issue was confirmed. However, the Court found that the confirmation of the second issue without a hearing was procedurally unfair.
        • Conclusions: The Court concluded that the assessment order and rectification order were passed in violation of natural justice principles and should be set aside.

        Remand for Fresh Consideration

        • Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: When an order is set aside due to procedural unfairness, the matter is often remanded for fresh consideration with instructions to follow due process.
        • Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court determined that the matter should be remanded to the assessing authority to allow the petitioner to present their case with a personal hearing.
        • Key Evidence and Findings: The petitioner expressed willingness to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as a condition for remand, which was not objected to by the respondent.
        • Application of Law to Facts: The Court applied the principles of fairness and due process, ordering the remand on the condition of payment by the petitioner.
        • Treatment of Competing Arguments: The respondent's proposal for remand upon payment of 25% of the disputed tax was modified by the Court to a fixed sum of Rs.5,00,000/-.
        • Conclusions: The Court ordered the remand for fresh consideration with specific instructions for compliance by both parties.

        SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

        • Preserve verbatim quotes of crucial legal reasoning: 'Violation of principles of natural justice is a failure of due process. If any order is passed against the petitioner with demand, that order has to be passed after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner otherwise, it will amount to depriving the interest of the petitioner and the same amounts to violation of principles of natural justice.'
        • Core Principles Established: The necessity of providing a personal hearing in tax assessment proceedings where adverse orders are contemplated, to uphold the principles of natural justice.
        • Final Determinations on Each Issue: The impugned assessment and rectification orders were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the assessing authority for fresh consideration. The petitioner was required to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as a condition for remand, and the respondent was instructed to provide a personal hearing before passing any new orders.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found