Ramesh Chandra and Mahaveer Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd. V. The National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry Of Finance and The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Income Tax Department, Pali and The Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department, Barmer

CW/6009/2022

AI Insights

The case involves two writ petitions filed by Ramesh Chandra and M/s Mahaveer Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd. against the National Faceless Assessment Centre and the Income Tax Officer, challenging the reopening of assessments and subsequent orders issued without adhering to the principles of natural justice. The petitioners argued that they were not given adequate opportunity for personal hearings and that the electronic submission windows were prematurely closed, preventing them from responding within the stipulated time. The respondents admitted to not providing the opportunity for personal hearings but contended that an alternative remedy of filing an appeal was available. The court found the actions of the respondents to be in violation of natural justice, leading to the quashing of the assessment orders.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 818109 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 21-07-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K K BISSA
• Assessee Lawyers: ANJAY KOTHARI
• Keywords: Assessment Reopening; E-Filing Portal; Income Tax; Natural Justice; Video conferencing
• Section: 148; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR (1) D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6009/2022 Ramesh Chandra S/o Shri Ram Chandra, Aged About 64 Years, 4/204, Kamla Nehru Nagar Pali Marwar 306401 (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. The National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry Of Finance, Inside Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Income Tax Department, Pali. ----Respondents and (2) D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9307/2022 M/s Mahaveer Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Having Its Registered Office At Flat No 703, B Wing, Mangal Deep Complex, Pal Balaji Road, Jodhpur 342008, Through Its Authorized Representative Kishore Jain, Age 52 Years S/o Dharam Raj Jain, Resident Of B- 708, Mangal Deep Complex, Pal Balaji Road, Jodhpur 342008. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, Ministry Of Finance, Inside Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi. 2. The Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Department, Barmer. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anjay Kothari. For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR (2 of 6) [CW-6009/2022 and CW-9307/2022] Order 21/07/2022 These two writ petitions involve identical questions of facts and law and hence the same are being decided by this common order. The petitioners have approached this Court through these writ petitions for assailing the impugned proceedings under the Income Tax Act, whereby assessment made by the respondent authorities qua the petitioners were reopened and fresh final assessment orders dated 31.03.2022 (For assessment year 2013- 14) (in D.B.C.W.P. No.6009/2022) and 24.03.2022 & 25.03.2022 (For assessment years 2016-17 and 2013-14 respectively) (in D.B.C.W.P. No.9307/2022) were passed allegedly without adhering to the principles of natural justice. Facts in D.B.C.W.P. No.6009/2022 A notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act dated 31.03.2021 was issued by the respondent No.2- Income Tax Officer to the petitioner proposing to re-assess the income of the petitioner for the assessment year 2013-14. The petitioner filed reply dated 16.07.2021 to such notice claiming that there was no occasion to initiate the re-assessment proceedings. Another notice was issued to the petitioner by the respondent No.2 under Section 142 (1) of the Income Tax Act dated 23.11.2021 to show cause and provide the relevant documents/accounts by 30.11.2021 to the Department. On 29.03.2022 a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner requiring him to show cause as to why the proposed variation should not be made and a reply was (3 of 6) [CW-6009/2022 and CW-9307/2022] sought from the petitioner by 23.59 hours of 30.03.2022 and an option was given to the petitioner to seek personal hearing through video conferencing. The petitioner filed a detailed reply on the very same day i.e. 29.03.2022 furnishing therewith all details supported by the relevant material. The petitioner also made a request for video-conferencing by availing the option given on the portal itself. However, the respondent No.2, without providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner proceeded to pass the order dated 31.03.2022 (Annexure-12) rejecting the reply of the petitioner and issued a demand notice to the tune of Rs.64,24,250/- which is assailed in this writ petition. Facts in D.B.C.W.P. No.9307/2022 Notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act dated 30.03.2021 were issued by the respondent No.2- Income Tax Officer to the petitioner proposing to re-assess the income of the petitioner for the assessment years 2013-14 & 2016-17. Prior to that on 16.03.2022, show cause notices were issued to the petitioner requiring it to show cause as to why the proposed variation should not be made for the assessment years concerned and replies were sought from the petitioner by 23.59 hours of 19.03.2022 and an option was given to the petitioner to seek personal hearing through video conferencing. On 19.03.2022, option for submitting reply and to seek personal hearing on the “Dashboard of the Income Tax Portal” was found to be closed by the petitioner on or about 12:30 PM, i.e. well before the time limit given in the above mentioned show cause notices that is, 23:59 (4 of 6) [CW-6009/2022 and CW-9307/2022] hours of 19.03.2022. Due to untimely/premature closure of the window, the petitioner was unable to file the reply and was also prevented from seeking an opportunity of personal hearing. Aggrieved by the arbitrary action of the respondents, the petitioner submitted a reply on the very same day i.e. on 19.03.2022, through e-mail furnishing therewith, all details supported by the relevant material and raising a grievance regarding premature closure of window before the time limit specified in the notices. However, the respondent No.2, without providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner proceeded to pass the impugned assessment orders dated 24.03.2022 & 25.03.2022 (Annexure-6 & 7 respectively) rejecting the reply of the petitioner which are assailed in this writ petition. Shri Kothari urged that admittedly the impugned assessment orders have been passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice justice because the rightful/bonafide request made by the petitioners for personal hearing through video conferencing/opening window on portal for submitting relevant documents and replies were not considered at all. In this regard, he has drawn the court’s attention to the show cause notice dated 29.03.2022 (Annex.6 to D.B.C.W.P. No.6009/2022), wherein an option was given to the petitioner to request for personal hearing and the reply to the same submitted on the very same day (Annex.7 to D.B.C.W.P. No.6009/2022). He has also drawn the attention of the court to the document (Annex.5 to D.B.C.B.W. No.9307/2022), whereby a grievance was raised that the window for submitting reply to the show cause notices dated (5 of 6) [CW-6009/2022 and CW-9307/2022] 16.03.2022 was closed before the stipulated time and thus, proper opportunity of hearing should be provided to the petitioner before proceeding further. He submits despite the above communications, the respondents have passed the impugned assessment orders, which are liable to be struck down on the ground of being violative of principles of natural justice. Mr. K.K. Bissa, learned counsel representing the respondents, has filed reply to D.B.C.W.P. No.9307/2022, wherein the fact that the window for e-submission on e-filing portal was closed before the stipulated time is neither accepted nor denied. The fact that opportunity of availing the remedy of personal hearing through video-conferencing was not provided to either of the petitioners is admitted by the respondents. However, Mr. Bissa submits that as an alternative remedy of filing appeal is available to the petitioners, these writ petitions are not maintainable. Having considered the submissions advanced at bar and having gone through the material available on record, we are of the firm opinion that the impugned proceedings suffer from gross violation of principles of natural justice and thus, the writ petitioners cannot be thrown out on the ground of alternative remedy. Hence, the impugned assessment orders 31.03.2022 (Annexure-12 to D.B.C.W.P.6009/2022) and dated 24.03.2022 & 25.03.2022 (Annexure-6 & 7 respectively to D.B.C.B.W. No.9307/2022) are declared invalid and are hereby quashed and set aside. The respondent authorities shall provide reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to submit detailed replies, if they so (6 of 6) [CW-6009/2022 and CW-9307/2022] desire. Thereafter, opportunity of personal hearing through video- conferencing shall be provided to the petitioners; the replies and the arguments advanced shall be objectively considered by the assessing authorities and fresh assessment orders shall be passed. The entire proceedings as directed above shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of this order. The writ petitions are allowed in these terms. (KULDEEP MATHUR),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J 72-73-Pramod/- "