Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2024 (8) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (8) TMI 1436 - HC - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the assessment order under section 143(3).
2. Compliance with principles of natural justice.
3. Requirement of a show-cause notice before passing the final assessment order.
4. Applicability of CBDT instructions and circulars.
5. Opportunity for personal hearing.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the Assessment Order under Section 143(3)

The petitioner challenged the assessment order dated 29.12.2022 for the Assessment Year 2021-22, passed by the respondent-Assessing Officer, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was invalid as it was passed without issuing a show-cause notice indicating the reasons for proposed additions/disallowances, which deprived the petitioner of the opportunity for a personal hearing.

2. Compliance with Principles of Natural Justice

The petitioner argued that the absence of a show-cause notice resulted in a breach of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to explain its position on the proposed additions/disallowances before the final order was passed. The petitioner relied on Instruction No. 20/2015 and other related instructions and circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), which mandate the issuance of a show-cause notice before passing the final order.

3. Requirement of a Show-Cause Notice Before Passing the Final Assessment Order

The petitioner emphasized that the respondent-Assessing Officer was required to issue a show-cause notice indicating the reasons for proposed additions/disallowances along with necessary evidence/reasons forming the basis of the same. The petitioner cited various instructions and circulars, including Instruction No. 20/2015, Instruction No. 3/2018, and Circular No. 27/2019, which mandate the issuance of a show-cause notice to ensure compliance with the principles of natural justice.

4. Applicability of CBDT Instructions and Circulars

The court noted that the provisions of section 144B(8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, allow the Principal Chief Commissioner or the Principal Director General in charge of the National Faceless Assessment Centre to transfer the case to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The court harmoniously construed the instructions and circulars issued by the CBDT, concluding that the requirement to issue a show-cause notice applies even when the case is transferred to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under section 144B(8).

5. Opportunity for Personal Hearing

The court observed that the Circular dated 06.09.2021 provides that the request for personal hearing shall generally be allowed to the assessee after the assessee has filed written submissions to the show-cause notice. The court held that the issuance of a show-cause notice is a prerequisite for granting a personal hearing to the petitioner-assessee. In the absence of a show-cause notice, the petitioner was deprived of the opportunity for a personal hearing, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.

Conclusion

The court concluded that the Assessing Officer committed a breach of the principles of natural justice by not issuing a show-cause notice indicating the reasons for proposed additions/disallowances along with necessary evidence. Consequently, the impugned assessment order was quashed and set aside. The matter was remanded back to the stage of issuance of a show-cause notice by the Assessing Officer, duly indicating the reasons for proposed additions/disallowances, to enable the petitioner to request a personal hearing if required. This exercise was directed to be completed within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the court's order. The rule was made absolute to the aforesaid extent, with no order as to costs.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates