9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 953 - HC - Income TaxAssessment u/s 153A - principles of natural justice has been violated by the respondent, while passing the impugned assessment orders - as per assessee no fair hearing was given to him by the Assessing Officer - whether the respondent has afforded a fair hearing to the petitioner in the assessment proceedings and whether the objections raised by the petitioner were considered by the respondent? - HELD THAT - As seen from the impugned assessment orders, adequate opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner by the respondent and only thereafter, the impugned assessment orders for the seven assessment years have been passed. As seen from the impugned assessment orders, each and every objection raised by the petitioner has been considered by the respondent. As seen from the impugned assessment orders, each and every objection raised by the petitioner in his written representation has been considered by the respondent, who has rejected the same by giving reasons. Whether the reasons for rejection given by the respondent is correct or not cannot be held to be violations of principles of natural justice. If the petitioner is aggrieved, his only remedy is to file the statutory appeal. The respondent has adhered to the principles of natural justice by providing a fair hearing and by giving the petitioner sufficient opportunity to raise all the contentions and the respondent has also given reasons for rejecting the objections raised by the petitioner under the impugned assessment orders. New plea raised by the petitioner before this Court that the assessment orders have been passed without authority under Law , since the operation conducted at the premises of the asseesee on 10.08.2017, according to him, is only a survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act and not a search under Section 132(4) - Said plea taken before this Court is absolutely baseless. Nowhere in the written representation submitted by the petitioner on 08.11.2019 before the respondent, the said plea was taken. In all the representations made during the course of impugned assessment proceedings, the petitioner has admitted that the operation conducted by the respondent on 10.08.2017 is only a search proceeding under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act. Contention of the petitioner that all the statements recorded by the respondent from his father are in typed format and have been prepared by the respondent to their whims and fancies - It cannot be a ground for filing these Writ Petitions, as the said objections were not raised by the petitioner during the course of the assessment proceedings. Even if such a plea is taken, this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India, cannot decide the said plea and it is only the statutory appellate authority concerned to decide the same based on the material and evidence available on record. The appellate authority is also a fact finding authority and therefore, the petitioner can get redressal from the statutory appellate authority and this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India, is not the correct forum. If the statements of copies were provided to the petitioner's father before his demise, he could have retracted his statements is concerned, the said contention will have to be necessarily rejected, in view of the fact that under Section 132(A) a request will have to be made by the person from whose custody any books of account or other documents were seized. In the case on hand, as seen from the documents filed along with the typed set of papers, this Court does not find any such request made by the petitioner's father during his life time seeking for copies of sworn statements given by him at the time of search under Section 132(A) of the Income Tax Act. Evidentiary value of loose sheets - Loose sheets picked up during search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, falls within the definition of document , mentioned in Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act and therefore, it has got evidentiary value. Therefore, the contention raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that loose sheets seized during the search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act does not have any evidentiary value, is rejected by this Court. Impugned assessment orders for the year 2018-19 passed without any authority under law - As seen from Section 153(A)(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, it is clear that the Assessing Officer shall pass order of assessment for six assessment years, immediately preceding the assessment years relevant to the previous year, in which search is conducted and of the relevant assessment year. In the case on hand, the search was conducted on 10.08.2017 and the relevant six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year, in which search was conducted, are 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 and relevant assessment year for the date of the search is 2018-19. Therefore, the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the assessment orders have been passed by the respondent for the year 2018-19 without authority under Law under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, is rejected by this Court. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in these Writ Petitions, as principles of natural justice has not been violated by respondent, while passing the impugned assessment orders and the consequential demand notices. Therefore, the only remedy available to the petitioner is to file the statutory appeal under Section 264A of the Income Tax Act, which he has failed to exercise till date. The decision relied upon by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax and others vs Chhabil Das Agarwal 2013 (8) TMI 458 - SUPREME COURT , while dealing with the alternate statutory remedy, is squarely applicable for the facts of the instant case. Writ Petitions are dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Legality of impugned assessment orders under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Alleged violation of principles of natural justice. 3. Evidentiary value of loose sheets seized during the search. 4. Authority of the respondent to pass assessment orders for the year 2018-19. 5. Maintainability of the writ petitions in light of alternative statutory appellate remedies. Detailed Analysis: 1. Legality of Impugned Assessment Orders: The petitioner challenged the assessment orders for the financial years 2012-13 to 2018-19, passed under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent conducted a search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act on 10.08.2017 at the premises of the petitioner’s late father, who was a partner in various firms. The petitioner argued that the statements obtained from his late father under coercion and the incomplete data retrieved from the newly installed software should not be used against him. The respondent countered that the search was conducted legally, and the statements recorded under Section 132(4) have evidentiary value. 2. Alleged Violation of Principles of Natural Justice: The petitioner contended that the assessment orders were passed without affording adequate opportunity of hearing, violating the principles of natural justice. The respondent, however, provided a detailed account of the notices issued and opportunities given to the petitioner to present his case. The court examined whether a fair hearing was provided and found that adequate opportunity was given, and the objections raised by the petitioner were considered by the respondent. 3. Evidentiary Value of Loose Sheets: The petitioner argued that the loose sheets confiscated during the search lacked evidentiary value, relying on the Supreme Court decision in CBI vs V.C. Shukla. The respondent countered that the loose sheets are admissible under Section 34 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, supported by the decision of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs Rangroopchand Chordia. The court agreed with the respondent, stating that the loose sheets fall within the definition of “document” under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act and have evidentiary value. 4. Authority to Pass Assessment Orders for 2018-19: The petitioner contended that the respondent lacked the authority to pass assessment orders for the year 2018-19 since the search was conducted on 10.08.2017, and the assessment for 2018-19 was not completed. The respondent clarified that under Section 153A(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, the assessment can be made for six preceding assessment years and the relevant assessment year. The court upheld this interpretation, confirming the respondent’s authority to pass the assessment orders for 2018-19. 5. Maintainability of Writ Petitions: The respondent argued that the writ petitions were not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative statutory appellate remedy under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act. The court agreed, referencing the Supreme Court decision in Commissioner of Income Tax vs Chhabil Das Agarwal, which emphasized the need to exhaust statutory remedies before approaching the court. The court dismissed the writ petitions, granting the petitioner liberty to file a statutory appeal within two weeks. Conclusion: The court dismissed the writ petitions, finding no violation of principles of natural justice and confirming the legality of the impugned assessment orders. The petitioner was granted liberty to file a statutory appeal under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act within two weeks.
|
