Wp/15758/2013 Of Adhikari Venkata Mohan Rao, Adhikari Hotel v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH ATHYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 15758 OF 2013 DATE: 14.11.2013 Between: Adhikari Venkata Mohan Rao … Petitioner And Income Tax Officer,Vijayawada, Krishna District& another. … Respondents This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTAANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 15758 OF 2013 ORDER:(Per the Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This writ petition has been filed challenging the assessment orderpassed by the Assessing Officer. Ordinarily, the writ Court does not interferewith this sort of cases, but when we noticed that the assessment order waspassed ex-parte and without hearing at all so to say against the heirs andlegal representatives of the deceased assessee, we have to interfere. From the certified copy of the impugned order, it appears that one of theheirs and legal representatives appeared before the Assessing Officer andthe others did not. Admittedly, the assessee has died intestate leavingbehind her survivors i.e., three sons and two daughters. She died on13.06.2012. At the time of hearing, the petitioner appeared and informed theAssessing Officer that other heirs are there and it should be notified. But, theAssessing Officer did not heed to that and proceeded to decide the matter ex-parte and passed the assessment order. In the aforesaid background of this case, we are constrained to hold thatthis order has been passed in complete violation of principles of naturaljustice. Learned counsel for the revenue/respondents submits that the petitioneris one of the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased assessee andhe represented at the time of hearing. Therefore, there is no violation ofprinciples of natural justice. We are unable to accept this contention and from the narration of thefact recorded by the Assessing Officer himself, it is clear that the opportunity of being heard at all was not given. We, therefore, pass the following order: The impugned assessment order of the Assessing Officer is kept inabeyance until the time, as directed by this Court. In the event the petitioner before us furnishes the names and addressesof other heirs or legal representatives within seven days from date, then theAssessing Officer shall serve notice to all of them as well as the petitioner forfresh hearing. After notice is served, if all or any of them appears, the matterhas to be heard de novo, after considering all objections on merit. If none ofthem appeared then the impugned assessment order will automatically standrevive. In the event, the petitioner does not furnish the names and addresses ofthe other heirs and legal representatives within the time stipulated above,then in that case the impugned assessment order will stand revive and thewrit petition stand dismissed. _____________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J