Petitioner's Challenge Dismissed: Pursue Statutory Remedy

The court dismissed the petitioner's challenge to the assessment order, finding no denial of a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The assessment was based on findings of tax evasion during search and seizure operations, justifying penalty notices issued. The court advised the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy under the IT Act before the Appellate Authority within 60 days, ensuring consideration on merits without dismissal for limitation reasons if all statutory requirements are fulfilled.

---

---

Issues:
Petitioner challenges assessment order for multiple years based on lack of opportunity, post-haste assessment, and penalty notice issuance without prior assessment.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to multiple petitions with a common question of law and factual matrix, consolidated for a common order. The petitioner contests the assessment order issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, alleging lack of reasonable opportunity to be heard. The Revenue argues that the petitioner was given due opportunity during search and seizure operations, with notices issued under relevant IT Act sections for different assessment years. The petitioner's contention that returns already filed should suffice for the assessment is considered, but discrepancies indicating tax evasion were found during the operations.

The petitioner also raises concerns about the assessment being rushed and penalty notices being issued without a prior assessment order. However, the court notes that the assessment order was based on detailed proceedings following the search and seizure operation, identifying tax evasion by the petitioner. The court rejects the petitioner's arguments regarding the pendency of litigation in another High Court and the issuance of penalty notices, stating that the Assessing Officer had jurisdiction to issue such notices based on the assessment findings.

Ultimately, the court finds that the petitioner failed to establish a case of denial of a reasonable opportunity to be heard. As the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy under the IT Act, the court declines interference and advises the petitioner to pursue the remedy before the Appellate Authority within 60 days. The court ensures that the case will be considered on its merits without dismissal on limitation grounds if all statutory requirements are met.

---