Court upholds assessment order for 2013-2014, grants liberty to appeal, no costs imposed

The Court upheld the assessment order for the assessment year 2013-2014, finding that the petitioner had sufficient opportunities to provide necessary details but failed to do so. The Court granted the petitioner liberty to appeal before the Appellate Authority within two weeks, allowing for interim relief during the appeal process. No costs were imposed, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order of assessment for the assessment year 2013-2014, sufficiency of opportunity provided to the petitioner before passing the order of assessment.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenges the order of assessment dated 22.01.2019 for the assessment year 2013-2014. The petitioner, an Assessee under the respondent, filed returns of income on 30.12.2014. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for reopening the assessment. The petitioner challenged the reopening through a writ petition, which was disposed of by the Court directing the Assessing Officer to provide reasons for reopening and allowing the petitioner to file objections. After objections were filed and rejected, leading to another unsuccessful writ petition, the impugned order of assessment was passed on 22.01.2019.

The petitioner contended that the impugned order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity to furnish objections or details, citing health issues preventing attendance at the hearing. Conversely, the Senior Standing Counsel argued that the petitioner had multiple opportunities to present material details but failed to do so, justifying the assessment order. It was suggested that the petitioner could appeal the order rather than seeking relief through a writ petition.

Upon hearing both sides and reviewing the case materials, the Court noted that the impugned order stemmed from the reopening of the assessment for the relevant year. Despite previous opportunities for the petitioner to present materials, no details were furnished on five adjourned occasions, leading to the completion of assessment by the Assessing Officer. The Court opined that the petitioner's request to reopen the matter before the Assessing Officer was not justified, as the Appellate Authority could address all contentions as a fact-finding body.

Ultimately, the Court disposed of the writ petition by granting the petitioner liberty to appeal before the Appellate Authority within two weeks. Any such appeal filed within the stipulated period would be considered without regard to the limitation period. The petitioner was also permitted to seek interim relief during the appeal process. The judgment concluded without imposing any costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

---