Gouri Parvathi Bayi V. Union of India and Central Board of Direct Taxes and National Faceless Assessment Centre and Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre and Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Kerala)

WP(C)/11127/2022

AI Insights

The case revolves around a writ petition filed by Gouri Parvathi Bayi, challenging the assessment order (Ext.P7) issued against her by the Income Tax department. The petitioner contended that the order was finalized without a personal hearing, despite her specific request for one. The respondents argued that the petitioner did not request a personal hearing at the appropriate time, and thus the principles of natural justice were not violated. However, the court found evidence in the form of a screenshot from the Income Tax portal, showing that a request for a personal hearing was indeed made. Consequently, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the assessment order and directing a re-assessment with a proper hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 802713 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 17-08-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: S CHAND; THUSHARA JAMES
• Assessee Lawyers: T M; V P NARAYANAN; NISHA JOHN
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Natural Justice; Personal hearing; Violation
• Section: 148; 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 26TH SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 11127 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: GOURI PARVATHI BAYI, AGED 79 YEARS T.C. 5/2355, KOWDIAR PALACE, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. BY ADVS. T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) V.P.NARAYANAN NISHA JOHN RESPONDENT/S: 1 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001. 3 THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, MAYUR BHAWAN, CONNAUGHT LANE, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 001, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF, COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (NAFAC). 4 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE (NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTRE), NEW DELHI-110 001. 5 THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (KERALA), CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, IS PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018. BY ADV S.SUBHASH CHAND, CGC SMT. THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C).11127/22 2 JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that Ext.P7 order of assessment was finalised against the petitioner without affording to the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing, though it was specifically requested for. 2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent department refers to the counter affidavit filed in this Court and states that though the assessee has sought for a personal hearing, vide letter dated 15.2.2022 and requested for an opportunity of being heard after the 15th of March, 2022, the same was not acceptable to the assessing officer as the assessment was getting time barred by 31.3.2022. It is submitted that the assessing officer issued a show cause notice along with a draft assessment order on 22.3.2022, giving an opportunity to file objections to the proposed variations. It is submitted that the assessee filed objections on 28.2.2022 and the order was issued after considering the objections raised by the assessee. It is submitted that while filing the objections on 28.2.2022, the assessee did not request for a personal hearing. It is also pointed out that the assessee/her representative did not click on the link in the system through which a request for personal hearing could be made and, therefore, the assessee cannot complain of violation of principles of natural justice. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, in reply, states that on 28.2.2022, the Income Tax portal shows that the petitioner/her representative W.P(C).11127/22 3 had requested for a personal hearing. A screenshot of the portal is made available to me, where it is seen that the assessee had stated that the matter requires explanation due to complexity of facts. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent department, I am of the view that in the light of the fact that the details in the portal maintained by the Income Tax department shows that on 28.2.2022 the petitioner/her representative had made a request for personal hearing through video conferencing and since the statute provides that such an opportunity must be granted if requested for, Ext.P7 order of assessment is issued in violation of principles of natural justice. Accordingly, Ext.P7 order of assessment is quashed. The 4th respondent is directed to pass fresh orders of assessment, after affording to the petitioner/her representative an opportunity of hearing through video conferencing. The writ petition is allowed in the above manner. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE okb/ //True copy// P.S. to Judge W.P(C).11127/22 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11127/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 DATED 29.07.2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 DATED 26.02.2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 DATED 08.05.2020 SERVED TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 15.02.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER SECTION 143(3) DATED 24.09.2021 ALONG WITH THE COMPUTATION SHEET OF RAM VARMA. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LETTER DATED 28.02.2022 SENT BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 11.03.2022 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.06.2021 IN WPC NO.5741/2021 OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT. "