TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 686X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be an information to the Assessing Officer, which may give a cause of action for issuing a pre-revision notice. After issuance of notice, when the dealer submits its objections, there is a statutory duty on the part of the Assessing Officer to consider the objections on all aspects and then, complete the Assessment, by passing a speaking order, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing. If the Assessing Officer fails to do so, it would amount to abdication of statutory duty cast upon the Assessing Officer, which is more than sufficient to set-aside the impugned order. Impugned assessment order is set-aside - petition allowed - matter on remand - decided in favor of petitioner. - W.P.No.31451 of 2016 & W.M.P.No.27289 of 2016 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cuments:- (i) Monthly return copy along with Annexures for the year 2014-15 (ii) Audited Balance Sheet copy and Form WW copy. (iii) Purchase bill copies along with statement of payment details. (iv) Bank Statement, Bank Statement for VAT and CST payment. (v) Form-C and Form-I (12 Numbers) for the year 2014-15 along with From-10 abstract copy. (vi) SEZ allotment copy. (vii) Copy of the debit / credit notes. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the second respondent, viz., the petitioner's Assessing Officer without issuing any notice and inviting any objections from the petitioner has completed the Assessment under the CST Act, for the year 2014-15. 5. It is pointed out by the learned couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able on record, this Court is inclined to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order is in violation of principles of natural justice. 8. As pointed out by the petitioner, the notice dated 31.07.2015 did not pertain to the Assessment year 2014-15. Even assuming the second respondent has construed the letter dated 29.03.2016 submitted by the petitioner, as an explanation or a reply, then, the second respondent should have discussed the contentions raised. However, on reading of the impugned order, it is seen that the Assessment has been completed solely, based on the VAT Audit. 9. Time and again, this Court has held that the Assessing Officer is an independent Statutory Authority, who has to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
