An assessment order passed without considering the reply submitted by the taxpayer, erroneously claiming no reply was filed, violates natural justice and warrants the court's interference to allow for a de novo assessment.

ORDER

The Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned order, dated

22.10.2024, which is an order of assessment passed under Section 73 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

2. The crux of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that eventhough the petitioner has filed a reply with reference to the discrepancies mentioned in the show cause notice, the same is not considered and the impugned order proceeds as if the petitioner did not submit any reply at all. The learned counsel would also submit that the petitioner has also raised grounds relating to the very jurisdiction, as this case arises out of a surprise inspection on the proceedings thereafter. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon certain decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in this regard.

3. Per contra, the learned Government Standing Counsel would submit that it is the duty of the assessee to have brought to the notice of the assessing officer and the assessee did not also make use of the opportunities of personal hearing that were granted by the authority.

4. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case.

5. A perusal of the impugned order shows that it proceeds as if the petitioner did not submit any reply at all, while the fact remains that the petitioner has filed a reply. In view thereof, the impugned order is liable to be set aside, and an opportunity has to be given to the petitioner. It is also stated that the disputed amount of tax has already been recovered.

6. In view thereof, the Writ Petition is allowed on the following terms:

(i) The impugned order dated 22.10.2024 shall stand set aside;

(ii) Within four weeks from the date of receipt of a web copy of the order, the petitioner will be entitled to file such an additional reply and document in support thereof, and the petitioner will be entitled to raise all grounds, including the question of jurisdiction, before the assessing authority itself;

(iii) It is for second respondent to consider the issue afresh and pass orders thereon in accordance with law;

(iii) No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.