2019 (3) TMI 442

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... HUSHARA JAMES JUDGMENT Faced with best judgment assessment under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the petitioner, in response to the Ext.P1 notice, replied through the Ext.P2. In that reply it has specifically sought an opportunity of being heard and also of filing additional documents if the petitioner's reply would not satisfy the assessing authority. 2. Indeed, the asses .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in the Ext.P2 has asked for a further opportunity of hearing. That means, the petitioner has already had one opportunity of hearing. Therefore, she contends that there is no violation of any principles of natural justice on the assessing officer's part. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 6. Indisputably, in the Ext.P2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... een that the respondents inspite of given a specific opportunity of filing written reply and for a hearing on the date of filing the reply did not opt for a personal hearing. If the respondent was not able to appear for personal hearing on the date of filing the reply it was absolutely open to him to request the officer to give a posting date for hearing him. xxxxxxxx" 8. True, the petitioner may .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X