Shree Pejawara Adhokshaja Mutt vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Facts

The petitioner, Shree Pejawara Adhokshaja Mutt, represented by its Head and Mathadhipathi, filed a writ petition challenging an Assessment Order dated 06.09.2022, bearing reference number ACCT/LGSTO280/ASMT-15/14/2022-23, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The petitioner's primary grievance was the alleged lack of opportunity to be heard before the assessment order was passed. The Show Cause Notice was issued on 18.08.2022, and the impugned order was passed on 06.09.2022, which the petitioner contended violated the statutory requirement for due opportunity. The respondent's counsel was unable to place on record proof of due service of notice and consequent opportunity to the petitioner.

Held

The Court allowed the petition, quashing the Assessment Order dated 06.09.2022. The Court found merit in the petitioner's grievance regarding the lack of opportunity. The respondent's counsel's inability to demonstrate due service of notice and the consequent opportunity to the petitioner was a critical factor. The Court reasoned that the principles of natural justice mandate that a party must be given a fair opportunity to present their case before an adverse order is passed. By quashing the order, the Court restored the proceedings, leaving all questions open for consideration by the Assessing Officer. The ratio decidendi is that an assessment order passed without affording the assessee a proper opportunity to be heard is unsustainable in law.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Assessment Order dated 06.09.2022, bearing reference number ACCT/LGSTO280/ASMT-15/14/2022-23, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, is liable to be quashed on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the lack of adequate opportunity to the petitioner? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed hastily, with a short gap between the issuance of the Show Cause Notice (18.08.2022) and the passing of the order (06.09.2022), thereby denying them a statutory due opportunity to present their case. They relied on the general principle of natural justice requiring an opportunity to be heard before an adverse order is passed. Respondent's Contention: The respondent's counsel was unable to provide evidence of due service of notice to the petitioner and the consequent opportunity afforded to them. Therefore, the respondent did not advance any arguments countering the petitioner's claim of lack of opportunity.