2023 (8) TMI 1073 - HC - Income Tax

Faceless assessment - contention of the petitioner is that the information sought for by the 1st respondent was very bald and vague - according to the petitioner effective opportunity was not granted to the petitioner - HELD THAT - It is seen that the petitioner is the Primary Agricultural Credit Society (PACS) and the society is formed for lending loans to the members who are farmers and the income is only from interest through lending business. The petitioner has submitted the details of its transaction in the annexures submitted along with the reply. On receipt of the reply the respondent has directed the petitioner to the submit the name and address along with PAN numbers of the members. The contention of the petitioner is that there are 3000 members and it is voluminous documents and hence the petitioner was is seeking personal hearing to produce the register manually. The respondent submitted since it is faceless assessment the request of the petitioner cannot be entertained. The petitioner further submitted since the society is lending money to farmers, the farmers may not have PAN numbers. The petitioner society may provide the PAN numbers where ever it is available and indicate where ever it is not available. This Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner ought to be granted one more opportunity to produce the register and to produce the other particulars sought for by the respondent. Therefore, impugned order is set aside. The petitioner is directed to reply to the notice, dated 16.11.2022, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the respondents shall fix the date of personal hearing as per law.

Summary

Issues:
The judgment involves a writ petition filed for a writ of Certiorari to quash an assessment order issued under the Faceless Assessment Scheme of the Income Tax Act.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Assessment Order and Response
The petitioner submitted explanations and documents in response to the notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act. Despite providing extensive documents, the respondents were not satisfied and issued further notices seeking specific details. The petitioner challenged the assessment order, claiming effective opportunity was not granted.

Issue 2: Opportunity for Personal Hearing
The petitioner requested a personal hearing to manually produce voluminous records due to being a Primary Agricultural Credit Society with numerous members. The respondents argued that since it was a faceless assessment, a personal hearing request was not submitted and could not be entertained. The petitioner also raised concerns about providing PAN numbers for all members, stating that farmers may not have PAN numbers.

Court's Decision
After considering the arguments, the Court found that the petitioner should be granted another opportunity to provide the requested details. The impugned order was set aside, directing the petitioner to reply to the notice within two weeks and allowing for a personal hearing. The Court emphasized providing sufficient and effective opportunities to the petitioner without citing any reasons.

Conclusion
The writ petition was disposed of with the above observations, with no costs imposed, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.