Sunil Jay Prakash Singh Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
A perusal of the Order passed by the Respondent No.5 indicates that the applications were rejected without affording any opportunity of being heard.
The question, as to, whether the tax liabilities are already quantified or not as on 30th June 2019 itself is a matter of dispute raised by the Petitioner in Writ Petition and also in the application/declaration filed under the said Scheme by the Petitioner before the Authorities. If according to the Respondents the tax liabilities were not quantified and the Petitioner was not eligible, the Respondents ought to have given an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner before passing such Order rejecting the application made by the Petitioner on the ground of ineligibility. If the Petitioner would have been given an opportunity, the Petitioner would have pointed out the quantification of tax liability during the course of the hearing. In our view, personal hearing was necessary in this situation.
The stand taken by the Respondents in paragraph No.18 of the Affidavit-in-Reply is that the Petitioner was not eligible to file the declaration under the said Scheme and thus the question of granting personal hearing was not warranted in the present case, is totally absurd and without application of mind. Whether the Petitioner was eligible to file declaration itself or not is an issue, which could be considered only after granting personal hearing to the Petitioner.
In our view the impugned Orders passed by the Respondents are in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and are liable to be quashed and set-aside.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT
