2022 (6) TMI 551 - HC - Income Tax

Court sets aside assessment order under Section 143(3) of Income Tax Act, ruling for petitioner's right to a personal hearing.

The Court set aside the assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the lack of opportunity for a personal hearing, ruling ... Validity of Faceless Assessment Order - breach of principles of natural justice - request for personal hearing denied - HELD THAT:- As in response to the show cause notice dated 22.04.2021, the petitioner had on 23.04.2021 sought an opportunity for grant of personal hearing. Despite receipt of this request by the respondent no.3, the impugned order has been passed after a period of almost two months but without granting any such opportunity. The impugned order does not indicate the reason for not granting such opportunity despite request for the same having been made within time and received by the respondent no.3. We find from the facts of the present case that failure to grant such opportunity to the petitioner has definitely caused prejudice to the petitioner. On the ground that the principles of natural justice have been violated, the impugned order of assessment is liable to be set aside. Accordingly for the aforesaid reasons, the assessment order dated 19.06.2021 is set aside. Considering the facts of the present case, the respondent no.3 shall grant an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner through video conferencing before it proceeds further in terms of the show cause notice. Issues: Challenge to assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 due to lack of opportunity for personal hearing.Analysis:1. The petitioner challenged the assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 19.06.2021, issued by the National Faceless Assessment Center (NFAC), New Delhi, for lack of opportunity for a personal hearing.2. The petitioner contended that despite requesting a personal hearing on 23.04.2021, within the specified timeframe, the assessment order was passed without granting the requested opportunity. The petitioner argued that the failure to provide a personal hearing before passing the order violated the principles of natural justice.3. The petitioner's counsel emphasized that the petitioner had timely requested a personal hearing, as per the notice's instructions, and that the assessment order should have been preceded by the opportunity for a personal hearing. The counsel pointed out that the absence of a personal hearing led to prejudice, as evidenced by discrepancies in the assessment order.4. In response, the respondents, through their counsel, contended that there was no breach of natural justice principles as the assessment order was passed after issuing a show cause notice and receiving the petitioner's response.5. Upon examination of the case and the documents, the Court found that the petitioner's request for a personal hearing was not honored, despite being made within the stipulated time frame. The Court noted that the failure to grant the requested personal hearing indeed prejudiced the petitioner, leading to a violation of natural justice principles.6. Consequently, the Court set aside the assessment order dated 19.06.2021 and directed the respondent to provide the petitioner with an opportunity for a personal hearing through video conferencing before proceeding with the assessment based on the show cause notice dated 22.04.2021. The Court kept all points on merits open and instructed the respondent to issue a fresh assessment order within four months from the date of the judgment.7. The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, setting aside the assessment order and mandating a fresh assessment procedure with the provision for a personal hearing, emphasizing the importance of adhering to natural justice principles in such proceedings.