TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 636X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r his failure to submit the documents and appear before the Assessing Authority within fifteen days. The appellant, in his representation, dated 10.07.2021, has requested time for collection of evidence and to submit documents. As per the earlier direction of this Court, the appellant was asked to appear before the Assessing Authority on a particular date. It is for the Assessing Authority to fix a date for hearing. If the communication is received immediately on the expiry of fifteen days time asked for by the appellant, he would only expect the second respondent to fix a date for hearing, so that he would be in a position to appear before the Assessing Authority and produce the documents to substantiate his case. Only in the said circ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19818, 19819, 19820 19821 of 2014 for different assessment years. 2.2. This Court, by order dated 15.07.2019, allowed the writ petitions, on the short ground that the assessment orders passed by the Assessing Authority are in violation of the principles of natural justice. However, this Court remitted the matter back to the file of the Assessing Authority with a direction to the appellant to appear before the Assessing Authority on a particular date for personal hearing. The Assessing Authority was also directed to pass fresh orders, after assessing de nova , within a period of four weeks from the date of conclusion of personal hearing. 2.3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the Assessing Authority issued summons, on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the appellant who wanted only fifteen days time, has no defence, according to the learned counsel for the appellant, is inappropriate and the said assessment order is again suffers from irregularity and it is again vitiated for violation of principles of natural justice. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the appellant, who is entitled to a fair opportunity, will have to take a risk before the Appellate Authority, as he has not produced any materials, which are required to substantiate his case before the Assessing Authority. 5. The learned Single Judge found that the appellant is having an effective alternative remedy of approaching the Appellate Commissioner. Further, the learned Single Judge observed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g Authority and produce the documents to substantiate his case. Only in the said circumstances, the assessment order impugned in the writ petition cannot be sustained merely because it was passed fifteen days after the expiry of the time asked for by the appellant. The appellant cannot be punished for expecting a notice fixing a date for hearing. Hence, this Court finds that the assessment order impugned in the writ petition is in violation of the principles of natural justice and finds merits in the writ petition. 7. In the result, (i) This writ appeal is allowed. (ii) The order dated 21.02.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD) No.3278 of 2022 is set aside. (iii) As a consequence, the assessment order dated 27. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
