9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 602X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... instead of responding to the notice dated 11th March 2024 had sought for an adjournment on 18th March 2024. At the instance of the petitioner time to file its response was extended till 22nd March 2024. From the documents on record it would appear that the petitioner had attempted to file its response after 5.00 P.M. on 22nd March 2024, i.e., beyond the office hours. The communication made by the petitioner to the samadhan portal has also not been disclosed. The petitioner has failed to identify what prejudice was caused to the petitioner by reasons of the assessing officer not considering its response and/ or whether the response submitted by the petitioner was different from the previous response submitted by the petitioner to the notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hereinafter referred to as the Said Act ) read with Section 144B of the said Act. Records reveal that the aforesaid order was preceded by a notice under Section 143 (2) of the said Act dated 2nd June 2023 in respect of the returned income of the petitioner for the assessment year 2022- 23. It is not in dispute that subsequently notices under Section 142 (1) of the said Act was issued on 2nd November 2023 as also on 14th December 2023. 3. The petitioner had responded to both the aforesaid notices. Subsequently the faceless assessment unit had issued a show cause dated 11th March 2024 for the assessment year 2022-23, calling upon the petitioner to respond to the proposed variations provided for therein. Particulars of the proposed variations ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only on 26th March 2024 at around 11.00 A.M. and by such time the assessment order dated 25th March 2024 had already been uploaded. As such, the faceless assessment unit, without considering the petitioner s response had disposed of the said proceedings. This according to the petitioner has the effect of vitiating the proceedings as the petitioner had been denied the opportunity to respond to the proposed variations. 7. It is submitted that this Court may be pleased to set aside the assessment order and to remand back the matter to the faceless assessment unit, for re-determining the issue on the basis of the response filed by the petitioner. 8. Mr. Dudhoria, learned advocate appearing for the respondents submits that the assessment order d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt on 18th March 2024. At the instance of the petitioner time to file its response was extended till 22nd March 2024. 11. From the documents on record it would appear that the petitioner had attempted to file its response after 5.00 P.M. on 22nd March 2024, i.e., beyond the office hours. The communication made by the petitioner to the samadhan portal has also not been disclosed. The petitioner has failed to identify what prejudice was caused to the petitioner by reasons of the assessing officer not considering its response and/ or whether the response submitted by the petitioner was different from the previous response submitted by the petitioner to the notice issued under Section 143 (2) of the said Act. 12. It would appear that the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
