9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 1133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cumentary evidence or logic has been put forth and the documents submitted were already considered while framing the draft assessment order. This fact is contrary to the record as it appears from the reply dated 19th April, 2021 which contained 16 annexures furnished by the petitioner, which were not supplied earlier. Moreover, the petitioner has not been granted any opportunity of hearing as provided under Section 144B of the Act. Thus, there is gross violation of principles of natural justice while passing the impugned assessment order contrary to the procedure prescribed under Section 144B of the Act, as held by this Court in case of Atulbhai Kantilal Mehta [ 2022 (1) TMI 1289 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] as well as in case of Agrawal JM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies, the same is taken up for final disposal today itself. 3. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the assessment order dated 2nd June, 2021 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) along with the demand notice issued under Section 156 of the Act for the assessment year 2018-19 on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice by not providing an opportunity of personal hearing as per the provisions of Section 144B(7)(vii) of the Act. 3.1 The petitioner filed its return of income for the assessment year 2018-19 on 4th October, 2018 declaring total income of Rs.3,36,05,290/-. The case of the petitioner was se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore, the respondent Assessing Officer ought not to have passed the impugned order in undue haste by overlooking the submissions and the evidence filed by the petitioner in response to the show-cause notice. It was submitted that as per the provisions of Section 144B(7) the petitioner ought to have been given opportunity of personal hearing. 4.1 In support of his submissions, learned Senior Advocate Mr.Hemani relied upon the decision of this Court in case of Atulbhai Kantilal Mehta Vs. The Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income-Tax Officer rendered in Special Civil Application No.13158 of 2021. 4.2 Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Hemani also referred to and relied upon the decision of this Court in case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reply dated 19th April, 2021, however, in paragraph 7.3 of the impugned assessment order it is stated by the Assessing Officer that the petitioner reiterated his earlier stand and no new documentary evidence or logic has been put forth and the documents submitted were already considered while framing the draft assessment order. 7. This fact is contrary to the record as it appears from the reply dated 19th April, 2021 which contained 16 annexures furnished by the petitioner, which were not supplied earlier. Moreover, the petitioner has not been granted any opportunity of hearing as provided under Section 144B of the Act. Thus, there is gross violation of principles of natural justice while passing the impugned assessment order contrary to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
