Mr.K.Venkatesh, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondent and by consent of the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of assessment dated 23.01.2017 passed in respect of the assessment year 2014-2015.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the only issue involved in this case is mis-match and the said issue was already considered by this Court in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017, wherein certain directions / guidelines are issued to the Assessing Officer to follow while dealing with the issue of mis-match. Therefore, he submitted that when the Assessing Officer in this case has not followed those procedures / guidelines, even before issuing the notice of proposal, failure to give a reply to the notice of proposal, will not absolve the liability of the Assessing Officer to pass the order of assessment in accordance with the order passed by this Court in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017.
5. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent submitted that since the petitioner has not utilized the opportunity by giving a reply to the show cause notice, the Assessing Officer is left with no other option, but to pass the assessment order.
6. Heard both sides.
7. It is not in dispute that the only issue involved in this matter is the mis-match and the said issue was already covered by the decision of this Court made in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017. It is true that the petitioner has not utilized the opportunity by giving a reply to the notice of proposal. However, as pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, even before issuing the said notice of proposal, the Assessing Officer has to do some exercise as stipulated in the above said order passed by this Court in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017. Therefore, there is no purpose in saying that the petitioner has not given a reply to the show cause notice. In any event, as the Assessing Officer has to re-do the assessment in the light of the order passed by this Court in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017, this Court is of the view that the matter should be remitted back to the Assessing Officer for re-doing the assessment after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well.
8. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order of assessment is set aside. Consequently, the matter is remitted back to the Assessing Officer for re-doing the assessment, commencing from the issuance of the notice of proposal after following the procedures / guidelines issued by this Court in WP.No.105 of 2016 etc., dated 01.03.2017. The whole exercise shall be completed by the Assessing Officer within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
21.06.2017 Speaking/Non Speaking Index : Yes/No mk Note: Issue order copy on 28.06.2017 To The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Chidambaram-II, Cuddalore District.
K.RAVICHANDRABAABU,J.
mk W.P.No.15583 of 2017 21.06.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in