AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Justice Antony Dominic
Petitioner is a Company registered under the Companies Act engaged in export activities. They are an assessee on the rolls of the 3rd respondent. They were issued Ext. P2 notice u/s 24 of the KVAT Act which also stated that they will be given an opportunity of hearing on 19/9/2012. Petitioner states that after receipt of the notice, the Chairman of the Company expired on 16/9/2012 and the funeral was to take place on 18/9/2012. The fact of death is certified by Ext. P3, the death report of the hospital. Petitioner says that on account of the above developments, they submitted Ext. P4 request dated 18/9/2012 requesting the 3rd respondent for an adjournment of the hearing. However, they did not get any response to Ext. P4 and on the other hand received Ext. P6 order passed on 29/9/2012 assessing the tax due. Along with Ext. P6, they also received a notice of demand calling upon them to pay Rs. 1,98,14,079/- It is challenging Ext. P6 assessment order and notice of demand, the writ petition is filed.
The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that on account of the death of their Chairman, it was not possible for the petitioner''s representative to appear for hearing in pursuance to Ext. P2. It is submitted that the fact of death was intimated to the 3rd respondent by Ext. P4, where a request was also made for an adjournment. It is stated that without granting their request, assessment was completed which according to the petitioner is in violation of the principles of natural justice.
The case was adjourned for the learned Government Pleader to obtain instructions in the matter. Instructions have been obtained and learned Government Pleader submits that the 3rd respondent did not receive Ext. P4 or any other request for an adjournment of the hearing. According to her, it was in these circumstances that the assessment has been completed as per Ext. P6. There is nothing on record to prove that Ext. P4 request of adjournment was served on the 3rd respondent and to that extent learned Government Pleader''s submission regarding the non receipt of this communication cannot be rejected.
However, fact remains that the Chairman of the Company expired on 16/9/2012 and his funeral was on 18/9/2012 and the hearing that was scheduled was on 19/9/2012. In such circumstances, even if the petitioner has not appeared for personal hearing, such a failure on the part of the petitioner cannot be taken as a willful one. In such circumstances, I feel that fairness requires that the matter should be reconsidered with an opportunity to the petitioner to file their objections to Ext. P2 notice and also with an opportunity of hearing. In order to enable the 3rd respondent to do so, I quash Ext. P6 assessment order and notice of demand and direct that within two weeks form today, petitioner shall file his objections to Ext. P2 and once objection is filed, the Assessing Officer will hear the petitioner and pass orders in the matter. Petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 3rd respondent for compliance.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.