2023 (8) TMI 1465 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of final assessment order passed u/s 147 r/w sec 144B - addition based on witness statement recorded u/s 131 - lack of opportunity to cross-examine a witness - HELD THAT - On perusal of the aforesaid impugned assessment order we find that the AO has passed the appellable assessment order by recording reasons in detail and find that the assessing officer could not be faulted since he has tried his level best to facilitate the cross-examination of the said witness and in addition the assessing officer has also recorded that he has completed the assessment on the basis of records available to him and it is not a case that while passing the aforesaid impugned assessment order the assessing officer has relied simply and only on the statement of the aforesaid witness. This writ Court is not a fact finding authority and cannot act as an appellate authority to reappreciate the evidence and come to a different conclusion and this is not a case of patent violation of principle of natural justice - WP dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved: Challenge to final assessment order u/s 147 read with 144B of Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 2017-2018 based on lack of opportunity to cross-examine a witness.

Summary:
The petitioner challenged the final assessment order dated 24th May, 2023, under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2017-2018. The petitioner contended that the assessing officer relied on the statement of a witness, Sri Mukesh Banka, under Section 131 of the Act, but the petitioner was not allowed to cross-examine this witness. The assessing officer passed the order by recording detailed reasons and made efforts to facilitate the cross-examination of the witness. The assessment was completed based on available records, not solely on the witness statement. The petitioner's request for cross-examination was hindered by the witness's non-attendance due to health issues, leading to the inability to conduct the cross-examination. The Court noted that it is not a fact-finding authority and cannot act as an appellate authority to reappreciate evidence. The Court found no patent violation of the principle of natural justice and dismissed the writ petition, citing the availability of an alternative remedy through appeal.

In conclusion, the High Court of Calcutta dismissed the writ petition challenging the final assessment order u/s 147 read with 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2017-2018. The Court found that the assessing officer had made efforts to facilitate cross-examination of the witness, Sri Mukesh Banka, and had not solely relied on the witness statement for the assessment. The Court emphasized that it cannot reappreciate evidence and act as an appellate authority. The petition was dismissed on the grounds of the availability of an alternative remedy through appeal.