Court critiques Assessment Orders in National Faceless Assessment, remits case for review

The court found the Assessment Orders lacking in discussion and justification, noting the constraints of the National Faceless Assessment regime. It emphasized the need for a strengthened assessment procedure with ample time for consideration. The case was remitted back to the National Faceless Assessment Centre for a fresh order within sixty days, with instructions for a video conferencing hearing and the opportunity for the petitioners to submit additional replies. The issue of jurisdiction was left open for the petitioners to raise. No costs were awarded, and the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions were closed, concluding the judgment.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Challenging Assessment Orders based on procedural grounds and lack of discussion in orders.

Analysis:
The writ petitions were filed against Assessment Orders for the Assessment Years 2019-2020, challenging the assessment by the National Faceless Assessment Centre. The petitioners argued that the assessment contradicted a Board circular and that the orders lacked reasoning. The impugned Assessment Orders were criticized for merely reproducing the petitioners' reply without proper discussion or justification for the conclusions reached.

The respondents defended the assessment, stating it wasn't solely document-based and that the petitioners didn't object to the jurisdiction of the National Faceless Assessment Centre. They argued that the petitioners had opted for statutory appeal before the Appellate Commissioner, making the writ petitions unnecessary. The respondents emphasized the efficacy of the alternative remedy available under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

In response, the petitioners highlighted concerns about the Appellate Commissioner's power being restricted, leading them to file an appeal due to expiring limitations. They contended that the impugned Assessment Orders were non-speaking and failed to provide adequate reasoning, affecting their ability to challenge the decisions effectively.

After reviewing the Assessment Orders, the Board circular, and relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the court found the orders lacking in discussion and justification. It noted that the assessment process under the National Faceless Assessment regime left insufficient time for both assesses and Assessing Officers to respond adequately, leading to mechanical and non-speaking orders.

The court acknowledged the pressure on both parties due to tight deadlines and called for a strengthened assessment procedure with sufficient time for thorough consideration. It directed the case to be remitted back to the National Faceless Assessment Centre for a fresh order within sixty days, emphasizing the importance of providing adequate time for assessment proceedings.

Additionally, the respondents were instructed to arrange a video conferencing hearing and allow the petitioners to submit additional replies or representations before the new orders were passed. The court left open the issue of jurisdiction for the petitioners to raise before the first respondent. No costs were awarded, and the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions were closed, concluding the judgment.

---