2015 (2) TMI 327 - HC - Income Tax

Application of cross examination - cross-examine the concerned MMTC Officials pertaining to the income assessed for the Assessment years 2006-2007 to 2012 -2013 on the basis of the so called payments said to have been made by MMTC - Held that - Admittedly, the appellate authority is following the procedures prescribed under the Income Tax Rules. There is also no prohibition for cross examining the parties concerned, if required. But the petitioner cannot pessimistic that his application for request to cross examine will be rejected. He should be optimistic and it is for the appellate authority to consider the request of the petitioner with regard to the Cross examination of the officials before deciding the final issue. Therefore, without going into the merits of the contentions raised in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition need to be dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to agitate all the issue raised in these writ petitions before the Appellate Authority. It is for the Appellate Authority to consider the request of the petitioner, before passing final order and before deciding all the issues in the appeal as well as in the applications, and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law. The appellate authority is at liberty to permit the petitioner to cross examine the officials of the MMTC, if required

Summary

Issues:
1. Mandamus for cross-examination of MMTC officials in appeal.
2. Mandamus to consider representation for preliminary issue in appeal.

Analysis:
Issue 1: The petitioner filed Writ Petitions seeking a mandamus for the opportunity to cross-examine MMTC officials in relation to income assessment for multiple Assessment Years. The petitioner contended that the alleged payments by MMTC needed to be thoroughly examined. The petitioner's request for cross-examination was rejected by the assessing officer, leading to the filing of the Writ Petitions.

Issue 2: Separate Writ Petitions were filed to direct the respondent to consider a representation regarding a preliminary issue in the appeal related to whether block assessment could be based on materials not part of the search conducted under the Income Tax Act. The petitioner sought a fair consideration of their objections and representation by the appellate authority.

The petitioner relied on previous judgments where cross-examination was permitted in similar cases. The respondent argued that the appellate authority should be allowed to decide on the matter without interference from the Court. The Court noted that the appellate authority was following prescribed procedures and had the discretion to permit cross-examination if necessary.

Ultimately, the Court dismissed the Writ Petitions with liberty for the petitioner to raise all issues before the Appellate Authority. The Court emphasized that it was for the Appellate Authority to consider the requests for cross-examination and decide the issues on merit and in accordance with the law. The Court also allowed the petitioner to agitate unresolved issues before the Appellate Authority.

Regarding the second set of Writ Petitions, the Court decided that the issues raised could not be resolved through the Writ Petitions and should be presented before the appellate authority as per the Income Tax Rules. The Court directed the appellate authority to expedite the process, considering the time elapsed since the initial filing.