SRI. SRINIVASMURTHY KATARAM S/O K. MALLAIAH V. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

WP/105035/2021

AI Insights

The case involves Sri. Srinivas Murthy Kataram, the petitioner, who challenged the assessment order and demand notices issued by the National Faceless Assessment Centre. The petitioner argued that they were not granted an opportunity to be heard, which is a mandatory requirement under the principles of natural justice. The court noted that despite the petitioner being given a show cause notice and additional time to respond, there was no actual hearing conducted. The court recognized the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic but maintained that the fundamental right to a hearing could not be overlooked. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned orders and directed a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 695483 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 17-12-2021
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: Y V RAVIRAJ
• Assessee Lawyers: PRASHANT GOUDAR
• Keywords: Assessment Order; COVID-19 lockdown; Natural Justice; Opportunity of Hearing; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 156

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA W.P.NO.105035/2021 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SRI. SRINIVASMURTHY KATARAM, SON OF K. MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, H. NO.48, K.H.B. COLONY, PARVATHI NAGAR EXTENSION, BELLARY – 583 103. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASHANT F.GOUDAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AAYAKAR BHAVAN NO.1, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 & TPS, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, STAFF ROAD FORT, BELLARY – 583 102. 3. THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI – 110 002. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. Y.V. RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.09.2021 BEARING NO.ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021-22/1036023748(1) PASSED BY THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE H AND THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 29.09.2021 BEARING NO.ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22/1036023856(1) PASSED BY THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE J AND THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 08.11.2021 BEARING NO.ITBA/RCV/F/17/2021-22/1036771016(1) PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE K. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: : 2 : ORDER The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that they were not granted an opportunity of hearing and the said order is required to be quashed as it was in violation of the mandatory requirement. 2. In the impugned order, the Assessing Authority has stated as follows: “3.7. The assessee was issued a detailed show cause notice on 27.05.2021 in DIN No.ITBA/AST/F/153C(SCN)/2021-22/1033127371(1) and the it was requested to furnish the details as called for vide this show cause notice. The assessee again requested for some time through letter emailed on 03.06.2021. Accordingly, the time was further granted upto 14.06.2021 to submit the relevant details called for. However, again on the same date i.e. on 14.06.2021, the assessee through email sent a letter to this office and asked for an adjournment. In the interest of the natural justice and covid-19 situations, the assessee was considered one more and final opportunity of being heard upto 21.06.2021 to file the submissions, details called for as per show cause notice. 4. In response to the final opportunity granted to submit the relevant details upto 21.06.2021 and in accordance with the detailed show cause notice issued dated 27.05.2021, the assessee filed its submissions on 23.06.2021 to this office, which are perused, considered and brought into records. The issues were brought into the notice of the assessee vide this office notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act, dated 20.04.2021 & show cause notice issued dated 27.05.2021. Subsequently, one of the directors of the assessee company Shri. Raju Patadia appeared time to time and made submissions; furnished relevant documents called for and case discussed. On : 3 : giving enough opportunity of being heard, discussions and considering the submissions made by the assessee, assessment order is passed in the subsequent paras”. 3. The order does not indicate that an enquiry was conducted or that a hearing was granted to the petitioner. This position is also not disputed by Sri. Y. R. Raviraj. 4. It is to be noticed here that the period mentioned in the impugned order relates to the period when the entire nation was subject to a lock-down. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner is only seeking an opportunity of hearing, in my view, it would be just necessary to grant them an opportunity of hearing. 5. I therefore, quash the impugned orders and direct the Assessing Authority to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass a fresh order. Writ petition is accordingly allowed. It is needless to state that all the contentions available to the petitioner can be raise before the Assessing Authority. Sd/- JUDGE SSP "