2015 (8) TMI 347

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Vice President /Authorised Signatory M.Shankar Raaman, challenging the impugned orders passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, Thiruvallikeni Assessment Circle, Chennai, TIN / 33850743129 / 2012-13 and 2013014 respectively dated 29.05.2015. 3.1 Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned orders dated 29.05.2015 are not sustainable for the reason that the respondent had issued the same by committing an error apparent on the face of the record, inasmuch as violating the principles of natural justice in not giving personal hearing to the petitioner before confirming the proposal, which is mandatory. 3.2. Adding further, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that even before the notices....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly for defect No.10, ignoring the ratio laid down by this Court cited supra and also overlooking the detailed reply submitted by the petitioner, the impugned orders have been passed. Therefore, it is a fit case where the petitioner should be afforded with an opportunity of personal hearing to explain their case. 3.4. However, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner fairly admitted before this Court that after the receipt of the notices dated 30.03.2015, the petitioner has not sent their reply/objection, but, according to him, it does not mean that the petitioner has not asked for personal hearing, when he has already submitted a written representation on 13.04.2015 seeking grant of personal hearing. 4. The learned Additional Government ....