2021 (10) TMI 685 - HC - Income Tax

Court sets aside assessment order due to procedural fairness violation, emphasizes compliance with requirements.

Sunil Meghraj Jain Versus The Union of India & Ors.

The court found that the failure to grant a personal hearing before passing the assessment order was a violation of procedural fairness. Due to this ... Non providing of personal hearing - Respondent No.2 without granting a personal hearing passed an assessment order on 23.09.2021 - HELD THAT:- Even if we accept what Respondent No.2 say that there was extreme urgency as scrutiny assessment was getting time barred by limitation on 30.09.2021, he still had one week to grant a personal hearing and there was no tearing urgency to pass the assessment order impugned in this petition.. We set aside the assessment order dated 23.09.2021 and remand the matter to the Assessment Officer to pass a fresh assessment order, within six weeks from this order getting uploaded in the High Court website, in accordance with law. Assessing Officer, however, shall grant a personal hearing to petitioner in accordance with the rules prescribed. We clarify that we have not made any observation on merits. Issues involved:1. Failure to grant a personal hearing before passing an assessment order.2. Compliance with procedural requirements in assessment proceedings.3. Setting aside the assessment order and remanding the matter to the Assessment Officer.Issue 1: Failure to grant a personal hearing before passing an assessment orderThe petitioner received a notice for assessment for a specific year, which included a provision for requesting a personal hearing after filing a reply. Despite the petitioner's request for a personal hearing, the assessment order was passed without granting the opportunity for a personal hearing. The court noted that there was no urgent need to pass the assessment order without providing a personal hearing, as the scrutiny assessment deadline was still a week away. The failure to grant a personal hearing was considered a violation of procedural fairness.Issue 2: Compliance with procedural requirements in assessment proceedingsThe assessment order mentioned that the petitioner had been given multiple opportunities to provide responses and evidences during the assessment proceedings. However, the court found that the failure to grant a personal hearing, as requested by the petitioner, was a procedural irregularity. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and providing a fair opportunity for the petitioner to present their case before finalizing the assessment.Issue 3: Setting aside the assessment order and remanding the matter to the Assessment OfficerIn light of the procedural irregularities and failure to grant a personal hearing, the court decided to set aside the assessment order dated 23.09.2021. The matter was remanded back to the Assessment Officer with a directive to pass a fresh assessment order within six weeks, ensuring compliance with the prescribed rules. The court clarified that the decision to set aside the assessment order was not based on the merits of the case, but rather on the procedural lapses observed.In conclusion, the court disposed of the petition, setting aside the assessment order and remanding the matter for a fresh assessment with the requirement of granting a personal hearing to the petitioner. Additionally, the consequential penalty notice and demand notice were also set aside. The parties were directed to act on an authenticated copy of the court's order to proceed accordingly.