2023 (2) TMI 210 - HC - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Petitioner sought adjournment of atleast 15 days to file objections to the issuance of notice u/s 148A - specific request made of 15 days on the ground that the tax consultant was busy in time barring assessment proceedings - HELD THAT -This Court in case of Gandhi Reality 2021 (12) TMI 313 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT has in detail dealt with this issue to hold that there has to be sufficient amount of opportunity to be given to the assessee. To choose not to reply and respond to the request and to then bring a surprise any time in between is something which this Court totally and completely disapproves. While acting as quasi judicial authority, it is expected to follow the principles, which are very well established and one of them is giving opportunity to the parties and to follow the procedure in accordance with law. The day on which the request is made either needs approval or rejection, however, once having kept silence and many days to have passed, it cannot suddenly choose to insist on answering within 24 hours as the other-side would also not be wrong in presuming that such a request is already acceded to and therefore, by 11.04.2022 it was required to file the reply. Had this been a case where he could have asked for a time beyond 11.04.2022 or it would not have been ready by 11.04.2022, the revenue could always contend that the time as per the request of the petitioner was available and yet it was not ready with the answer and in such an eventuality, the Court could have noted the circumstances differently, which is not the case here. Therefore, this needs to be construed and held to be the process which is in violation of the principles natural justice and hence, the order of assessment deserves to be quashed by warranting interference at the hands of the Court. Needless to say that the process is to be initiated from the stage where it has been left. Let the opportunity of personal hearing be granted or intimated to the petitioner. The matter be disposed of in accordance with law.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to action of respondent authority under Article 226 of the Constitution of India regarding issuance of notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act for Assessment Year 2018-19 without granting sufficient time for objections.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed the original return of income for Assessment Year 2018-19 on 05.10.2018. A show-cause notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act was issued on 20.03.2022, asking for a response by 27.03.2022. The petitioner requested 15 days to file objections due to the tax consultant's busy schedule, but no response was received. An email on 05.04.2022 granted time till 06.04.2022 at 1:30 p.m., citing the matter as time-barred. On 06.04.2022, the petitioner asked for a three-day adjournment, stating objections were being prepared, but the request was not considered. The Court found a clear violation of the principles of natural justice, emphasizing the importance of providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee. The respondent's failure to respond to the petitioner's requests and sudden imposition of a tight deadline without valid reasons was deemed unacceptable. The Court referred to the case law of Gandhi Reality to stress the need for fair procedures and adequate opportunity for parties. The order of assessment was quashed due to the violation of natural justice, and the Court directed that the process be restarted from the stage it was left, ensuring the opportunity for a personal hearing. The petition was disposed of with no costs imposed.

This judgment highlights the significance of adhering to principles of natural justice in administrative actions, especially in quasi-judicial proceedings. It underscores the duty of adjudicating authorities to provide reasonable opportunities to parties, rejecting arbitrary imposition of deadlines without valid justifications. The decision serves as a reminder of the essential procedural fairness required in such matters, emphasizing the need for transparency, responsiveness, and respect for the rights of the parties involved.