2015 (2) TMI 1232 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of reopening of assessment - not providing any fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner - Held that - Without furnishing a copy of the statement stated to have been given by Mukesh Choksi and without notifying the petitioner regarding basis of the transaction that petitioner is said to have entered into with Mukesh Choksi respondent has passed the impugned order. The entire basis for the impugned order is the sworn statement of Mukesh Choksi. Unless petitioner is given opportunity to have his say in the mater with regard to the said statement and its contents it cannot be said that petitioner was given an opportunity of being heard in the matter. Hence it has to be held that the impugned order is passed without providing any fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenging assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2007-08 based on re-opening of assessment due to alleged undisclosed income from share transactions without providing a copy of the sworn statement by a third party.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested the assessment order dated 30.06.2014 passed by the Income Tax Officer, challenging the addition of a sum of Rs. 6,34,475 to his income for the assessment year 2007-08. The re-opening of the assessment was based on a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issued on 30.06.2014, following a search conducted by the income tax authorities at Mumbai on certain entities. The respondent attributed the additional income to the petitioner from shares purchased using allegedly undisclosed income. The petitioner objected to the lack of specific allegations against him in the sworn statement made by a third party, Mukesh Choksi, which formed the basis of the re-opening of proceedings and subsequent assessment order.

The petitioner argued that without being provided a copy of the statement by Mukesh Choksi or being informed of the basis of the alleged transactions, he was denied a fair opportunity to present his case. The petitioner emphasized that the assessment order solely relied on the statement of Mukesh Choksi without giving him a chance to respond to the contents or allegations therein. Drawing parallels to a judgment by the Delhi High Court, the petitioner highlighted the importance of providing fair and reasonable opportunity to be heard in such cases where third-party statements are pivotal to the assessment process.

The High Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, concluded that the petitioner was indeed deprived of a fair hearing due to the non-disclosure of the statement and related details regarding the alleged undisclosed income. In light of the denial of a proper opportunity to present his case, the Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned assessment order, and directed a fresh consideration by the respondent. The Court stressed the necessity of providing a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, including furnishing the relevant details and copy of the statement forming the basis of the assessment order.

In the final order, the Court granted permission for the petitioner's counsel to file a memo of appearance within three weeks, signaling the continuation of the legal proceedings in the matter. The judgment highlighted the fundamental principle of natural justice that requires individuals to be given a fair chance to respond to allegations or evidence against them before any adverse decisions are made, especially in tax assessment matters where substantial financial implications are involved.