TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (2) TMI 374
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....84 and 12130 of 2019 respectively. 2.The writ petitions were filed challenging the assessment orders passed by the respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as "the TNVAT Act") for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2015-16. 3.The principal ground, on which the writ petitions were filed, is alleging that there has been serious violation of principles of natural justice, since no personal hearing was granted after the evidence and documents were filed by the appellant/writ petitioner pursuant to the notices issued by the respondent proposing to revise the assessment by invoking his power under Section 27 of the TNVAT Act. Apart from the said ground, other subsidiary grounds were r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... same has to be applied with utmost rigour when it comes to matters relating to tax, cess etc. 6.With regard to the allegation of violation of principles of natural justice, which was taken as a ground in the writ petitions, the learned Single Bench took a view that opportunity was afforded to the appellant not once, but twice, but they did not avail the same. Therefore, it ultimately concluded that the Writ Court will not exercise its discretion and the writ petitions are not maintainable. Though we fully agree with the legal aspect as brought out by the learned Single Bench in the impugned order, we have taken note of the factual position in the assessee's case and would make a slight departure from the ultimate conclusion reached ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... it is communicated that an opportunity of personal hearing is available. It was so held taking note of the fact that there may be cases where on objections being received to the revision notice, the Assessing Officer may agree with the dealer and drop the revision proceedings. Though this may be a rare phenomena, yet it cannot be said that it will never occur. Therefore, we are of the view that the first pre-revision notice does not satisfy the principles of natural justice. 7.The appellant would contend that after they had filed objections and submitted the documents, they were eagerly waiting for the Assessing Officer to call them for a personal hearing. This did not happen and the assessment orders were passed and communicated to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cise its jurisdiction. Those exceptions are if a writ petition has been filed for an enforcement of any fundamental right where there has been a violation of principles of natural justice at the instance of an inferior authority or where the proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or ultra vires the statute under which such proceedings have been initiated (see Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, 1998 (8) SCC page 1 at paragraphs 14 & 15, Pages 9 & 10 of the report), a writ petition can be entertained. 25. In Whirlpool Corporation (supra), the learned Judges have considered the various judgments in coming to the aforesaid conclusion. In this connection, learned counsel for the appellant also cited a judgment of a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me has been denied, the impugned order is hereby quashed. Therefore, opportunity of personal hearing especially, in matters relating to taxation is a very effective tool where the dealer and the Assessing Officer have an opportunity to interact and certain facts will emerge during the interaction, which may not be apparent on print. That apart, we have also noted that the current situation is not very conducive both for the appellant as well as the state exchequer and the appellant has also claimed for refund, which according to them, they are rightfully entitled. This Court deems it appropriate to modify the ultimate conclusion arrived at by the learned Single Bench by directing an opportunity to be granted to the appellant, which shall....