Dismissal of Writ Petition on Tax Assessment Order Challenge due to Procedural Non-compliance

The Court dismissed the writ petition challenging an assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, citing non-compliance with Section 144B. The Court noted the retrospective omission of Section 144B(9) from 1.4.2021, rendering the procedural challenge invalid. The petitioner was advised to pursue statutory remedies by appealing before the appropriate authority within thirty days for addressing the raised issues.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 based on non-compliance with the procedure under Section 144B of the Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a firm engaged in real estate and construction, challenged the assessment order passed under Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner sought various reliefs, including quashing the assessment order, demand notices, and penalty proceedings. The petitioner contended that the assessment proceedings were non-est due to non-compliance with the procedure prescribed under Section 144B of the Act. The petitioner highlighted that despite requesting a virtual hearing, the respondent department passed the assessment order without granting the opportunity, contrary to the provisions of Section 144B. The petitioner relied on various High Court orders to support its argument regarding the procedural irregularity.

The respondent argued that the assessment order was appealable under Sections 246A, 254, and 260A of the Act before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and further appellate authorities. The respondent contended that the petitioner should have availed the statutory remedies before approaching the High Court directly. However, the respondent did not dispute the petitioner's claim of requesting a virtual hearing before the assessment order was passed.

In response to the objection on the maintainability of the writ petition, the petitioner argued that the non-compliance with Section 144B rendered the assessment proceedings non-est, making the writ petition maintainable. The Court considered the arguments presented by both parties and examined the records.

The Court noted that the Ministry of Law and Justice had omitted sub-section (9) of Section 144B of the Act with retrospective effect from 1.4.2021. As a result, the ground raised by the petitioner regarding non-compliance with Section 144B was no longer valid. The Court concluded that the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy of filing an appeal before the appellate authority to address the issues raised in the writ petition. Therefore, the Court dismissed the writ petition, advising the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority within thirty days for further consideration of the grievances and grounds raised in the petition.

---