Tax Assessment Order Overturned: Court Upholds Right to Cross-Examine Witness in Fair Tax Proceedings.

The Calcutta HC, in an intra-Court appeal, set aside the assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the lack of opportunity for cross-examination of a witness. The Court remanded the matter to the assessing officer, directing fresh summons for the witness, ensuring his presence for cross-examination, and allowing the appellant to submit additional replies. The decision must exclude the witness's statements if non-cooperation persists. The appeal was allowed, emphasizing the necessity of a fair chance for cross-examination in tax proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Challenge to assessment order u/s 147 read with 144B of Income Tax Act for not being granted opportunity to cross-examine witness u/s 131.

Summary:
The Calcutta High Court, in an intra-Court appeal, addressed the challenge against an assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant contested that they were not given the chance to cross-examine a witness, Mukesh Banka, whose statement was recorded under Section 131 of the Act. The Single Bench had dismissed the writ petition, leading to the current appeal.

The Court noted that the assessee's request for cross-examination of Mukesh Banka was initially accepted by the department. However, due to technical issues with the video conferencing link, the assessee missed the opportunity. Subsequent attempts for cross-examination were hindered by Mukesh Banka's non-cooperation, leading to the assessing officer relying on his statements without allowing the cross-examination.

The Court emphasized that the department should either provide a fresh opportunity for cross-examination of Mukesh Banka or disregard his statements and allow the assessee a fair chance to present their case. Failing to provide the opportunity for cross-examination would prevent the authority from relying on Mukesh Banka's uncontroverted statements.

Consequently, the Court set aside the assessment order and remanded the matter back to the assessing officer. The officer was directed to issue fresh summons to Mukesh Banka, ensure his presence for cross-examination, and allow the appellant to submit additional replies. The decision should be made based on the materials available on record, excluding Mukesh Banka's statements if he refuses to cooperate.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed, the assessment order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration, emphasizing the importance of providing a fair opportunity for cross-examination in such proceedings.

---