HC Remanded the Matter as the AO Passed a Non-Speaking Order Without Addressing the Petitioner’s Objection

Case Details: Tvl. V M & Co. v. State Tax Officer - [2024] 168 taxmann.com 707 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Mohammed Shaffiq, J.
• Raja Karthikeyan for the Petitioner.
• J.K. Jayaselan, Govt. Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was engaged in execution of works contract. The department issued notice alleging huge difference in sales turnover. It submitted reply that some of works were executed during VAT regime and some portion in GST regime. However, the Assessing Officer merely noted that reply was not convincing, and passed order which did not reflect reasoning. It filed writ petition against the order

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that reasoning is the heart-beat of every conclusion and absence of reason would vitiate the proceedings. In the instant case, the impugned order did not reflect any reasoning and the Assessing Officer had not dealt with the objections of the petitioner at all. Therefore, it was held that the impugned order suffered from the vice of being a non-speaking order and thus violated principles of natural justice. The Court also allowed department to re-do the assessment after granting another opportunity to assessee.