Overlapping tax assessment orders and ex parte reassessment were set aside to ensure fair hearing and fresh adjudication.

Two assessment orders could not survive for the same tax period and overlapping discrepancies against the same assessee; the redundant order was quashed, while the order containing an additional discrepancy was retained. An ex parte assessment involving turnover mismatch, input tax credit mismatch and late fee claims was set aside because the assessee had not been effectively heard and supporting records had not been considered; the matter was remanded for fresh decision on merits, with consequential lifting of the bank attachment.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether two assessment orders could survive for the same tax period and same discrepancies against the same assessee; (ii) whether the ex parte assessment order deserved to be set aside and remanded to afford the assessee an opportunity to place materials.

Issue (i): Whether two assessment orders could survive for the same tax period and same discrepancies against the same assessee.

Analysis: The assessment period was the same and the overlapping discrepancies could not be dealt with through two orders against the same assessee for the same year. The existence of an additional discrepancy in one order justified retaining that order while the overlapping order could not stand independently.

Conclusion: The order challenged in the first writ petition was unsustainable and was quashed in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the ex parte assessment order deserved to be set aside and remanded to afford the assessee an opportunity to place materials.

Analysis: The assessment was completed without effective participation of the assessee, and the dispute involved turnover mismatch, input tax credit mismatch, and late fee claims that required consideration of the assessee's explanation and supporting records. In the circumstances, and having regard to the partial recovery already made, an opportunity was warranted to enable a fresh decision on the merits.

Conclusion: The ex parte assessment order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration, with consequential lifting of the bank attachment.

Final Conclusion: The assessee obtained relief against the overlapping order and a fresh opportunity before the assessing authority in the remanded matter, while the department was left free to proceed afresh in accordance with law on the surviving assessment.

Ratio Decidendi: Where overlapping assessment orders cover the same tax period and discrepancies, the unsustainable order may be quashed, and an ex parte tax assessment involving disputed turnover and input tax credit mismatches may be remanded to ensure a fair opportunity of hearing and fresh adjudication on merits.

---