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

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (5) TMI 982

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n of the principles of natural justice. The Commissioner did not commit any error of law warranting interference from a superior appellate forum under the circumstances in deciding the case on merit. Moreover, the assessee had full opportunity to deal with the issue on merit before the Tribunal. Commissioner had outlined the manner in which the enquiry was to be carried out. There is no specific direction in the order stipulating in what way the case was to be decided. The Assessing Officer has been directed to pass a speaking order after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee and upon verifying the source of share capital including the share premium of all the subscribers and rotation of money through various hands so as to as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in the name of Arihant Tradecomm Pvt. Ltd., which company merged with Aim Fincom Pvt. Ltd., with effect from 1st April, 2013 and it is this company who are the appellant before us. In their return, for the above referred previous year, the assessee had declared loss of ₹ 4,314/-. The assessment order was made accordingly. There was re-assessment proceeding triggered by a communication of the assessee informing the Assessing Officer that miscellaneous income of ₹ 24,000/- in the relevant previous year was not accounted for inadvertently. In such circumstances, there was re- assessment upon service of notice under section 148 and section 143(2) of the Act. In the order of reassessment dated 31st December, 2011, there is reference .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by a letter dated 28th November, 2013 to the assessee (Annexure-C to the stay petition) fixing 10th December, 2013 as the date of hearing. There was prayer for adjournment of hearing on that date on the ground of passing away of father of the senior authorised representative of the assessee on 9th December, 2013. But there is no material to show that such prayer for adjournment was made on 10th December, 2013 or on any date prior thereto. As it appears from the despatch slip, photocopy of which is reflected in Annexure-D to the stay petition, the letter seeking adjournment was posted on 12th December, 2013, two days after the date fixed for hearing. The Commissioner appears to have had concluded the hearing on the scheduled date i.e. on 10 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is to be inferred that the Commissioner also lacked jurisdiction to direct the enquiry as contained in his order. 5. As regards the first point of Mr. Dasgupta, we find that the prayer for adjournment was not before the Commissioner on the day the hearing took place. Opportunity of hearing thus cannot be said to have had been denied. Reference to the letter of adjournment in the order of the Commissioner cannot be a ground for revisiting the circumstances under which the order was passed on 10th December, 2013. We are of this view because on the date scheduled for hearing the assessee had not applied for adjournment, the assessee cannot take advantage of post hearing prayer for adjournment, even though the Commissioner had referred to s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ustified. No application for adjournment was made on the day the hearing was scheduled to take place before the Commissioner. If the noticee does not turn up before the authority before whom he has to respond to the notice, but seeks adjournment of hearing after two days, the noticee cannot complain of violation of the principles of natural justice. This would constitute a default on the part of the noticee in availing of the opportunity of being heard. A subsequent prayer for rehearing would be akin to an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in which case the noticee has to demonstrate sufficient cause for recalling the order passed in a proceeding in which he could not remain present. The letter of the assess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates