2024 (12) TMI 780 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of order of reassessment - order stated to have been issued in violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - A perusal of Exhibit-P13 reveals that sufficient opportunities were granted to the petitioner by serving notices upon him both physically as well as through email. In fact, a response was filed by the petitioner pursuant to the notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act and he had even sought further time for filing an additional response. Subsequent thereto, no objection was filed, and then the Income Tax Officer passed appropriate orders in accordance with law. Moreover, in Annexure-R1A, petitioner himself had provided an e-mail address for communication. The response to the notice under Section 148A(b) was submitted through that e-mail ID. Hence, notices issued to that e-mail ID cannot be said to irregular. Thus, it cannot be said that the petitioner had not been granted notice of the proceedings. The repeated notices sent to the petitioner were met with a response once, which itself indicates that the petitioner was aware of the proceeding. It has been repeatedly held by the Supreme Court and various other High Courts that failure to avail of an opportunity cannot be regarded as absence of opportunity. In the instant case, it is evident that the petitioner had failed to avail the opportunity granted. The contention that he was unaware of the technological mode of serving notices cannot be accepted in the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, I do not prima facie find any merit in the contention now raised by the petitioner regarding violation of principles of natural justice. Thus this is not a fit case for this Court to interfere in the exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order for the year 2016-2017 based on violation of natural justice principles under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Violation of Principles of Natural Justice
The petitioner contested the Exhibit-P13 assessment order for the year 2016-2017, alleging it was issued in violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner sold an immovable property in the financial year 2015-16 but failed to file a return for the assessment year 2016-17. The Income Tax Officer issued a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, followed by subsequent notices, including under Section 148. The petitioner argued that the capital gain calculation was erroneous, and the assessment was based on vague information. The petitioner also claimed that the assessment process was not in line with the faceless assessment scheme.

Issue 2: Adequacy of Notices and Opportunities
The respondent pointed out that multiple notices were served on the petitioner physically and via email, with proof of delivery. The petitioner had provided an email address for communication, and responses were submitted through that email ID. The court noted that the petitioner had been granted sufficient opportunities to respond to the notices, including seeking additional time, but failed to do so. The court emphasized that failure to avail opportunities cannot be equated with a lack of opportunity.

Issue 3: Technological Awareness and Opportunity
The court rejected the petitioner's argument of being unaware of the technological mode of serving notices, stating that the petitioner had failed to avail the opportunities granted. The court found no merit in the contention of a violation of natural justice principles, considering the circumstances of the case.

Conclusion
The court dismissed the writ petition, stating it was not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner was granted the liberty to pursue statutory remedies and appeal the decision. The court clarified that the period spent on the writ petition would be excluded from the limitation period for filing an appeal.