Assessment orders deemed invalid due to lack of reasons and failure to adhere to mandatory notice periods.

1. Admittedly the petitioner is the owner of premise no. 10/1A, Bidhan Sarani, Kolkata - 700006 and let out the portions of the said building to several persons on the basis of an agreement or upon issuance of the rent receipts. The challenge is made to the several assessment orders passed on March 21, 2017 determining the annual valuation for the purpose of property tax with effect from various quarters ranging between 2nd quarter, 2007-08 and 2nd quarter, 2016-17. It is undisputed that the hearing notices all dated 1st March, 2017 were served upon the petitioner proposing to revise the annual valuation of the said premises for different quarters. It was further indicated in the aforesaid notices that the date of hearing is fixed on 21st March, 2017 at 11:30 AM. Undisputedly, the petitioner appeared before the hearing officer indicated in the aforesaid hearing notices and was served with the impugned assessment orders on the said date.

2. According to the petitioner, though he appeared before the hearing officer and asked him to disclose the purpose, object and modus of purported assessments in respect of different quarters indicated in each hearing notices in order to file the specific written objection comprehensively, but no hearing was conducted on the said date. On the contrary, the petitioner was handed over with the copies of the purported impugned orders all dated 21st March, 2017 finalizing the annual valuation and the liability towards the property tax. The petitioner thus states that the schedule for hearing was merely a camouflage and in fact, no opportunity to defend the proposed annual valuation was afforded to the petitioner.

3. The substratum of the case made out in the writ petition is that the hearing officer sat with the pre - determined mind and without affording an opportunity of hearing the impugned assessment orders well prepared ahead were served upon the petitioner who was also asked to put his signature on various registers and the documents.

4. On the other hand, the corporation says that the petitioner inspected the assessment register / inspection book prepared on the basis of an information and was satisfied with the inputs recorded therein and put his signature thereon. It is further stated that the petitioner never asked for the extension of time to file written objection nor raised any objection against the proposed annual valuation and therefore the allegation that no hearing was conducted is unfounded, untrue and belied on the basis of the documents.

5. The corporation annexed the orders passed by the hearing officer for each quarters recorded on the order sheets, which contains the signature of the petitioner at the bottom. The copy of the assessment register / inspection book also contains the signature of the petitioner which is also annexed to the writ petition.

6. Both the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties advanced their arguments on various points including the point that the assessment order is bereft of any reasons. The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that there has been a total denial of natural justice in not affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as the hearing was a mere camouflage. It is further submitted that the hearing notices do not depict the clear 30 days period as required under S.184(4) of the said Act, which is mandatory. It is submit