Court dismisses petition challenging assessment notice, citing no breach of natural justice, grants liberty to appeal.

The court dismissed the petition challenging the notice seeking to reopen assessment and penalty notices for the assessment year 2013-2014. The court found that there was no breach of natural justice as the notices were duly served on the petitioner's Chartered Accountant. It held that the petitioner had an alternate remedy of appeal and noted documentary evidence of cash deposits in the petitioner's bank account against the surrendered PAN. The court granted liberty to appeal the assessment order on all grounds but emphasized that its observations should not unduly influence the appeal process.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to notice seeking to reopen assessment and penalty notices based on reassessment notices for AY 2013-2014.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the notice seeking to reopen the assessment and penalty notices based on reassessment notices for the assessment year 2013-2014. The respondent argued that the petitioner had an alternate and efficacious remedy available to challenge the assessment order and, therefore, the petition should not be entertained. The petitioner contended that there was a breach of principles of natural justice and fair play, as the assessment order was uploaded against a PAN that did not pertain to the petitioner but to a non-existent company. The petitioner further argued that despite surrendering the PAN, the impugned notices were served in the name of the non-existent company. The petitioner also highlighted that the objections raised were not adequately considered, and the assessment order ignored their contentions.

The respondent claimed that the impugned notices were duly served on the petitioner's Chartered Accountant through email, as per the details provided by the petitioner to the Income Tax Department. They argued that the petitioner was attempting to create grounds for alleging a failure of natural justice without suffering any prejudice. The respondent also pointed out several cash deposits against the surrendered PAN, which the petitioner claimed to have deactivated. The respondent contended that the petitioner failed to disclose these details, indicating that the petition should not be entertained and the petitioner could appeal the assessment order.

The court, after considering the arguments, held that it was not a fit case for the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction, as the assessment order had already been made, and the petitioner had an alternate remedy of appeal. The court found no prima facie case of breach of natural justice, as the impugned notices were served on the petitioner's Chartered Accountant through the registered email ID. The court also noted documentary evidence of cash deposits in the petitioner's bank account against the surrendered PAN. The court referred to legal precedents to distinguish the petitioner's arguments and ultimately dismissed the petition but granted liberty to appeal the assessment order on all grounds, subject to legal objections. The court clarified that its observations were prima facie and should not unduly influence the appeal process.

---