The central legal point established in the judgment is that assessment proceedings must comply with the principles of natural justice, including providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard and conducting proper inquiry before passing an assessment order.

We have heard Sri Bharat Ji Agarwal, learned Senior Counsel along with Sri Shubham Agarwal and Sri Piyush Agarwal for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned Special Counsel for the State.

2. By our order dated 14th March, 2016 we had directed the Special Counsel for the State to produce the original record relating to the assessment proceedings. We have perused the same. Based on the order sheet and other records we are proceeding to decide the petition finally without calling for a counter affidavit.

3. The petitioner provides direct to home (DTH) broadcasting service upon being granted a licence under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and under the Indian Wireless & Telegraph Act, 1933. The petitioner has distributors and dealers within the State of U.P., through which Set Top Boxes have been installed to their subscribers. It seems that certain inquiry was initiated by the Assessing Officer on 11th January, 2016 with regard to verification of the consignment sales, which were partly considered and the matter was adjourned finally on 10th February, 2016. In the meanwhile, on 8th February, 2016 the assessing authority issued a direction for issuance of notice for the purpose of making a provisional assessment for the month of April, 2015 to December, 2015 and directed the office to issue a notice fixing 10th February, 2016 as the first date. The records indicates that the online notice was generated by the office on 9th February,2016 at 5: 37 p.m. It is apparently clear that the notice was served thereafter.

4. The petitioner contends in Paragraph 21 that the notice was served at 8: 30 p.m. on 9th February, 2016 indicating that the petitioner was required to appear on 10 February, 2016 with regard to the provisional assessment proceedings. The records further indicates that petitioner appeared on 10th February, 2016 and requested for adjournment in order to file a reply. The matter was adjourned and 15th February, 2015 was fixed. The order sheet of 15th February, 2016 indicates that the assessee, namely, the petitioner did not appear nor any application was filed for adjournment. No other order was passed thereafter. The order sheet indicates that an assessment order was passed on 16th February, 2016. The order sheet also indicates that some reply was given by the petitioner on 16th February, 2016 at 5: 30 p.m. and, on the instructions given to the Special Counsel, the said reply was taken on record after the assessment order was passed.

5. Be that as it may. We are of the opinion that the entire proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer for making a provisional assessment was done in haste and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, which is engrafted under Article 14 of the Constitution of India read with Section 25 (1) of the U.P. VAT Act. For facility Section 25 (1) is extracted hereunder:

25. Assessment of tax for a tax period - (1) Where in respect of any tax period of an assessment year-

(i) any dealer has not submitted tax return with the time prescribed or within the time extended by the assessing authority, or if tax return has been submitted without payment of tax shown payable in such return; or.

(ii) preliminary examination of tax return, by the assessing authority, reveals that computation shown in the tax return are wrong or amount of input tax credit claimed or tax payable shown is incorrect; or

(iii) on the basis of material available on records with the assessing authority, it appears to the assessing authority that the turnover of sales or purchases or both, disclosed by the dealer is not worthy of credence; the assessing authority may, after making such inquiry as it may deem fit and after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the dealer, determine-

(i) to the best of its judgment the turnover, amount of tax payable and amount of input tax credit admissible, where the dealer has not submitted tax return or if the tax return has been submitted, the assessing authority i