HOTEL RAGHAVENDRA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Tribunal Appeal:

(2.) WHETHER or not the appellate authority has violated the principles of natural justice in not affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant or its authorized representative before rendering the impugned order on 16.2.2006, is the subject matter of the Tribunal Appeal preferred by the unsuccessful appellant contending, inter alia, that the very fact that though the appellant engaged Mr. P. Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate, to represent it, mention of the name of Mr. M. Ramachandra Murthy, Chartered Accountant, to have represented the appellant, is a proof positive that neither the appellant nor its authorized representative, Mr. P. Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate, was heard on 16.2.2006 when the appeal was posted for hearing, for the first time, but though a notice of hearing was sent to the appellant to appear on 15.2.2006, the appeal was not taken up for the hearing on 15.2.2006, and it seems to have been taken up for hearing on 16.2.2006 after the appellate authority took over charge and as held by the Supreme Court of India in State of Kerala Vs. Mathew (S.C.) [ : (1978) 42 STC 348], passing of a best judgment assessment order without providing for a proper opportunity to the appellant to rebut the allegations amounts to violation of the principles of natural justice and, as such, the impugned order is not sustainable and is liable to be set aside.

(3.) ASSAILING such a dismissal of the appeal without affording any opportunity of hearing either to the appellant or its authorized representative Mr. P. Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate, the appellant has preferred the Tribunal Appeal on hand with the contentions as narrated in para -1.