1 Writ Petition No.8591/2011 08.11.2011. Shri P.M. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner. Ms. M. Ravindran, learned Dy.G.A. for the respondent. The writ petition is heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. O R D E R This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the assessment order dated 06.06.2011 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Ujjain in Case No. 495/2009 (VAT) for the period 01.04.06 to 02.12.09 in respect of the block assessment. Though the assessment order has been challenged before this Court on several grounds, but the learned counsel for the petitioner at the time of arguments has emphasized that the order of assessment has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as the petitioner-assessee has not been given adequate opportunity to produce the relevant documents which were not available with him having been seized by the Excise Department. Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the 2 arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that under the VAT Act, the burden of proof that sale or purchase effected by the dealer was not liable to tax was on the dealer which the assessee-dealer in this case has failed to discharge, therefore, the assessment has been rightly framed. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is undisputed before this Court that a search of the petitioner's business premises was done by the Central Excise Department and the documents relating to the business were seized by the Central Excise Department. The impugned assessment order itself indicates that a plea was raised by the counsel for the petitioner before the assessing authority that the documents seized by the Central Excise Department were not returned to the petitioner, therefore, he was not in a position to produce the same at the time of assessment and for that purpose, a prayer was made before the Assessing Authority to grant time, but the said prayer was rejected by the Assessing Authority on the sole ground that the case was getting time barred. Learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly stated before this Court that if an opportunity is given to the petitioner to produce the relevant documents, he would make an attempt to obtain the copies of the documents seized by the Excise 3 Department and produce them before the Assessing Officer and if any difficulty is faced in obtaining the copies, he would file an appropriate application before the Assessing Authority for summoning those documents. On the perusal of the impugned assessment order, we have noticed that the assessment has been framed without giving any adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to produce the relevant documents. The Assessing Authority rejected the prayer of the petitioner for time to produce the document which has resulted into violation of principles of natural justice and miscarriage of justice. It has been pointed out that the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the matter of R.S. Seth Gopikishan Agrawal and Sons, Tumsar Vs. Shri C.L. Sharma, Asstt. Commissioner of Sales Tax,, Jabalapur and Ors. reported in 1971(XXVIII) STC 106 in similar circumstances, had quashed the assessment order with a direction to the Assessing Authority to pass fresh order in accordance with law. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the impugned assessment Order (Annexure P/1) dated 06.06.2011 cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside. The petitioner will be at liberty to obtain the copies of the relevant documents from the Excise Department or to satisfy the Assessing Authority that a case for summoning the relevant record from the Excise 4 Department is made out. The Assessing Authority, after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to produce the relevant documents, will pass the fresh assessment order. Since we have set aside the impugned assessment order, therefore, at the time of passing of the fresh assessment order, it will be open to the petitioner to raise all such grounds which are legally permissible to him. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. ( Shantanu Kemkar ) (Prakash Shrivastava) J U D G E J U D G E. Dube/