Court dismisses Writ Petition challenging Income Tax assessment order for AY 2017-18. Emphasizes cooperation in assessment process.

The court dismissed the Writ Petition challenging an assessment order under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2017-18. The petitioner alleged a violation of natural justice due to non-receipt of notices and non-filing of income tax return. Assessment relied on bank data from demonetization. Despite the petitioner's health issues, non-cooperation in responding to notices led to dismissal. The court emphasized the importance of cooperation in the assessment process and concluded that interference was unwarranted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. No costs were imposed, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was also dismissed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order based on Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2017-18; Allegation of violation of principles of natural justice due to non-receipt of notices by the petitioner; Non-filing of income tax return by the petitioner; Assessment based on bank information regarding demonetization period transactions; Lack of response to notices issued by Assessing Authority.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with a challenge to an assessment order passed under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The main contention raised was the alleged violation of principles of natural justice as the petitioner claimed not to have received further notices beyond one dated 14.02.2018. The petitioner had not filed a return of income for the relevant year. The assessment was primarily based on information provided by the petitioner's bank regarding specified bank note deposits during demonetization and other transactions. Despite notices issued by the Assessing Authority, the petitioner did not respond, citing health issues preventing her from instructing her Chartered Accountant.

The court noted that while the petitioner acknowledged receiving the notice dated 14.02.2018, there was no compliance. The petitioner submitted a subsequent affidavit, termed a 'Better Affidavit,' to clarify facts. The court clarified that a better affidavit should elaborate on unclear or inadequate facts rather than alter the fact pattern substantially. It was emphasized that the petitioner's non-cooperation in the assessment process, including failure to file a statutory return of income and respond to notices, did not warrant interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Ultimately, the court dismissed the Writ Petition, stating it was not an appropriate case for interference and ordered no costs to be imposed. The connected Miscellaneous Petition was also dismissed.

---