Court quashes Assessment Orders for lack of petitioner participation, directs new order issuance within 90 days

The Court quashed the Assessment Orders for the years 2013-14 and 2014-15 due to the petitioner's inability to participate in the personal hearing and the premature passing of the orders. The Court directed the tax authority to issue a new assessment order within 90 days, allowing the petitioner to provide submissions and participate in a video conference. The Court granted the writ petitions with specific directives and closed the related petitions, concluding the legal proceedings without imposing costs.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to Assessment Orders under Income Tax Act for Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15, Failure of Personal Hearing via Video Conference, Validity of Impugned Order, Quashing of Orders, Directions for Reassessment.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested the Assessment Order dated 28.09.2021 issued under Section 147/155 r/w Section 144 B of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The petitioner received a Show Cause Notice along with a Draft Assessment order, requesting a personal hearing for oral submissions. However, due to technical difficulties accessing the ITBA portal on the scheduled dates, the petitioner was unable to participate in the video conference for the personal hearing. Despite the petitioner's reply and subsequent communication from the Income Tax Department, the impugned assessment order was passed before the rescheduled video conference date, raising concerns about due process.

The Court acknowledged the petitioner's inability to engage in the personal hearing and the premature passing of the assessment order by the first respondent. Consequently, the Court deemed the impugned orders unsustainable and quashed them. In light of the dispute concerning the Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15, the first respondent was directed to issue a comprehensive order based on merits and legal provisions within ninety days of receiving the court's order. Additionally, instructions were given to the Web Portal Administrator to enable the petitioner to submit any replies within 30 days and to schedule a video conference for the personal hearing. Subsequently, the first respondent was mandated to issue a fresh re-assessment order within thirty days following the aforementioned steps.

In the final judgment, the Court allowed the writ petitions with the specified directives and observations, without imposing any costs. The connected miscellaneous petitions were consequently closed, bringing an end to the legal proceedings in this matter.

---