2018 (9) TMI 552

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the assessment years 2011-2012 to 2015-2016. 2. Mr. M.Hariharan, learned Additional Government Pleader (Tax) takes notice for the respondents. By consent of the parties, these main writ petitions are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3. Mr. R.Venkataraman, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the impugned orders of assessment were passed without affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to place their objections with materials documents. He further contended that for filing such objections, the petitioner needs to collect voluminous documents and therefore, they want sufficient time for filing the reply, which the Assessing Officer failed to consider. It is his further ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....terials available before him. Insofar as the issue with regard to the penalty is concerned, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the notice of proposals sent to the petitioner contained the proposal for imposing the penalty also. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to give their reply, which they miserably failed to do. 5. Heard both sides. 6. The present dispute between the parties is in respect of five assessment years viz., 2011-2012 to 2015-2016. Apart from these five assessment years, notice of proposal were sent to the petitioner in respect of the other three assessment years viz., 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2016-2017. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had given their reply to those three assessment year....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t, 2006. It is true that the petitioner has not given any reply to the notice before conclusion of the assessment. But, at the same time, perusal of the impugned orders insofar as the imposition of penalty portion is concerned, would show that no reasons or findings are given as to how the Assessing Officer is satisfied to impose the penalty on the petitioner. The assessment orders are totally silent on that aspect. Needless to say that while imposing penalty, not only an opportunity of personal hearing should be given to the petitioner and also the orders of assessment should spelt out reasons and findings as to how the imposition of penalty and warranted in that case. In the absence of any justifiable reasons stated for imposition of pena....