9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 53X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mber 2021 were in fact not served on him physically - HELD THAT:- For the AO to conclude in the impugned assessment order that despite the above notices no compliance was made by the Assessee, does not appear to be correct, particularly when no hearing took place admittedly after 1st February, 2021. The impugned assessment order was passed on 29th September, 2021, almost eight months after 1st F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed before Opposite Party No.3 on 14th February, 2022. A fresh assessment order after hearing the Petitioner shall be passed in accordance with law within a further period of three months thereafter. The Court clarifies that the present order has proceeded only on the procedural illegalities and does not touch upon the merits of the case. - W.P.(C) No.36622 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 3-1-2022 - The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment order, the notice served on the Petitioner on 28th December 2020 was not by the Assessing Officer (AO) who passed the impugned assessment order, but by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Cuttack (DCIT) with whom the file was earlier pending before it was transferred to the present AO. 3. It is further seen from the impugned assessment order that the actual hearings were st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h September, 2021, almost eight months after 1st February, 2021, the last date of hearing. 5. It is thus apparent that no hearing took place after 1st February, 2021 and yet notices were supposed to have been served on the Assessee on at least two dates after the last hearing date. In the circumstances, the Court is satisfied that the Petitioner was not given an effective opportunity of hearing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
