Thus, as already stated supra, the notice calling forth the petitioner’s reply to be filed within a limited time cannot be deemed to a notice affording fair opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Had it been the real intention of the respondent Department to provide fair opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, obviously, the respondent Department would have given reasonable time for the petitioner to file their reply along with supportive documents. But on a perusal of all three notices dated i) 21.04.2023 (I opportunity of hearing) ii) 16.06.2023 (II opportunity of hearing) and iii) 21.06.2023 (III opportunity of hearing) it could be clearly seen that the respondent-Department has granted only a limited time of i) 14 days, ii) 4days and iii) three days respectively. Therefore, the so-called three opportunities of hearing given nominally to the petitioner but in reality, the second respondent has not provided any fair opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to put forth their defence. This Court would further like to point out herein that under the guise of providing opportunity, the assessee should not be called for to file reply within a short span of time, within 2 days insofar as present case is concerned. If done so, the object behind which the provisions of the Act was enacted on the aspect of ”provision of fair opportunity to the assessee” will not be achieved and the same would lead to depriving away the legal rights of the assessees to defend themselves.
