Court sets aside assessment orders, citing violation of natural justice principles under Income Tax Act.

The Court found a violation of natural justice principles in the assessment orders challenged under Sections 153A and 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The orders were set aside, and the matters remanded for fresh assessment. The Assessing Officer was directed to decide on the notices under Section 142(1) after providing the petitioner with an opportunity to be heard. The petitioner was instructed to file responses within two weeks and appear before the Assessing Officer on a specified date. Writ petitions and pending applications were disposed of accordingly.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging assessment orders under Section 153A and 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, notices of demand under Section 156, notices of penalty under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) for Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2019-20.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged assessment orders under Sections 153A and 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, along with notices of demand under Section 156 and notices of penalty under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) for various Assessment Years. The petitioner contended that the assessment orders were passed in violation of natural justice principles and without providing an effective hearing. The petitioner claimed that an email from the Income Tax Department led them to believe that the deadline for responding to a notice was extended indefinitely due to the Covid-19 lockdown. This lack of opportunity to respond resulted in significant financial demands and penalty proceedings against the petitioner.

The respondent argued that the initial notices were issued by the Income Tax Department, but the subsequent email granting an extension was not from them. The respondent contended that considering the initial notices would satisfy the principles of natural justice. However, the Court found that there was inadequate compliance with natural justice principles due to the limited opportunity given to the petitioner to reply during the lockdown period. The petitioner had also detailed the documents they possessed to clarify issues raised by the Assessing Officer.

Consequently, the Court held that there was a violation of natural justice principles. The impugned orders were set aside, and the matters were remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment orders. The Assessing Officer was directed to decide on the notices under Section 142(1) by providing a reasoned order after giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. The petitioner was instructed to file responses within two weeks and appear before the Assessing Officer on a specified date. The writ petitions and pending applications were disposed of, with the order to be uploaded on the website and forwarded to the counsel via email.

---