2021 (11) TMI 1069 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of assessment order u/s 144B - petitioner was unable to participate in the personal hearing - petitioner attempted by press Hyperlink but was unable to open the ITBA portal for the personal hearing. Thus, no personal hearing was not conducted - HELD THAT - Considering the fact that the petitioner was unable to participate in the personal hearing through video conference and considering the fact that the impugned order has been passed by the first respondent even before the 2nd date fixed for Video Conference, the impugned order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the impugned orders are hereby quashed. Considering the fact that the dispute pertains to the Assessment year 2013-14 2014 15, the first respondent shall pass a speaking order on merits and in accordance with law, preferably, within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents are directed to give appropriate instructions to the Web Portal Administrator to facilitate the petitioner to file reply, if any, within a period of 30 days and to give a link for the personal hearing through video conference on the date to be fixed by the first respondent.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Assessment Orders under Income Tax Act for Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15, Failure of Personal Hearing via Video Conference, Validity of Impugned Order, Quashing of Orders, Directions for Reassessment.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested the Assessment Order dated 28.09.2021 issued under Section 147/155 r/w Section 144 B of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The petitioner received a Show Cause Notice along with a Draft Assessment order, requesting a personal hearing for oral submissions. However, due to technical difficulties accessing the ITBA portal on the scheduled dates, the petitioner was unable to participate in the video conference for the personal hearing. Despite the petitioner's reply and subsequent communication from the Income Tax Department, the impugned assessment order was passed before the rescheduled video conference date, raising concerns about due process.

The Court acknowledged the petitioner's inability to engage in the personal hearing and the premature passing of the assessment order by the first respondent. Consequently, the Court deemed the impugned orders unsustainable and quashed them. In light of the dispute concerning the Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15, the first respondent was directed to issue a comprehensive order based on merits and legal provisions within ninety days of receiving the court's order. Additionally, instructions were given to the Web Portal Administrator to enable the petitioner to submit any replies within 30 days and to schedule a video conference for the personal hearing. Subsequently, the first respondent was mandated to issue a fresh re-assessment order within thirty days following the aforementioned steps.

In the final judgment, the Court allowed the writ petitions with the specified directives and observations, without imposing any costs. The connected miscellaneous petitions were consequently closed, bringing an end to the legal proceedings in this matter.