2015 (4) TMI 283

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndents. 3.The petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petitions challenging the impugned order, dated 30.1.2015 and to quash the same. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the first respondent issued notice dated 5.11.2014, proposing to re-open the assessment for the year 2013-14 and the petitioner also filed his reply on 17.11.2014. But, before ever, the reply could reach the respondent, the first respondent has passed the impugned order dated 30.1.2015. He would also submit that for submitting the Declaration Form in Form-C only a short time was given, since, the transaction of the petitioner involves stock transfer from one office to another office in various parts of the State and other States....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....non est in the eye of law.  As the impugned order is not in consonance with the materials available on record, challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court with this Writ Petition. 5.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents fairly submitted that before ever the reply could reach the respondent, the first respondent, without considering the reply, has straightaway passed the impugned order and therefore, the matter may be remitted back, so that the petitioner will be given an opportunity to produce the Declaration Form in Form-C and in turn, the first respondent will consider the same along with the reply of the petitioner dated 17.11.2014 and  redo the assessment for the year 2013-14. ....