M/S.Hotel Theni International vs. The Asst.Commissioner(CT)

Held

The Court held that the impugned assessment order dated 11.12.2018 was vitiated by a violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court found merit in the petitioner's submission that the respondent failed to deal with the petitioner's request for furnishing details. The Court noted that the respondent's order itself acknowledged the petitioner's request for details but proceeded to confirm the proposal without providing them or rejecting the request. The Court reasoned that unless the petitioner is informed of the material sought to be used in framing the assessment, they would have difficulty responding to the proposal. Therefore, the failure to provide the requested details and address the objections rendered the assessment proceedings invalid. The Court set aside the impugned order and directed the respondent to complete the assessment afresh after furnishing the details sought by the petitioner and granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Hotel Theni International, filed a writ petition challenging an order of assessment dated 11.12.2018 for the assessment year 2010-11, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (CT), Theni. The assessment was based on an inspection by the Enforcement Wing, which found that the petitioner had supplied free snacks and complimentary breakfast without supporting documents and that intranet website verification revealed mismatches. The petitioner had requested specific details regarding the figures used in the assessment and the transactions showing mismatches in a letter dated 24.10.2017. However, the respondent passed the impugned order without furnishing these details or addressing the petitioner's objections.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned assessment order dated 11.12.2018, passed for the assessment year 2010-11, is vitiated by a violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically concerning the respondent's failure to provide requested details and deal with the petitioner's objections, as contemplated under Section 27 of the TNVAT Act, 2006? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the assessment order was passed in violation of natural justice because the respondent failed to furnish the requested details regarding the figures used in the assessment and the alleged mismatches. The petitioner argued that without these details, they could not effectively respond to the proposed assessment. The petitioner relied on the principle that a party must be put on notice of the material used against them to respond adequately. Respondent's arguments: The respondent argued that a notice of personal hearing was granted and reiterated the grounds for the assessment order. The respondent did not explicitly address the petitioner's specific request for details or the failure to deal with the objections.