Petitioner's Right to Hearing Upheld in Assessment Order Challenge

The court held that the petitioner was afforded an opportunity of hearing as the assessment order was issued after considering the petitioner's reply to the show cause notice. The court emphasized that failure to address all objections in the reply does not justify intervention under Article 226/227 and should be remedied through the statutory appeal process. Since the petition was filed promptly and the petitioner still had time to file a statutory appeal, the court dismissed the writ petition, refusing to interfere with the assessment order.

---

---

Issues involved:
Challenge to assessment order under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India based on lack of opportunity of hearing and non-consideration of objections in the reply.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the assessment order dated 30.03.2022, alleging that the authority passed the order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing and without considering the objections raised in the reply to the show cause notice. The petitioner contended that despite having an alternative remedy, the order should be set aside due to grave legal errors and violation of principles of natural justice.

The petitioner's counsel relied on various decisions, including Tin Box Co. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2001) 249 ITR 216 (SC), Milestone Brandcom Pvt. Ltd. vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre (2022) 441 ITR 470 (Bom), CCTEB India (P) Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2022) 6 NYPCTR 497 (Del), and Ketan Ribbons Pvt. Ltd vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi. The respondent's counsel, however, supported the impugned order, arguing that due opportunity of hearing was provided, and the petitioner had an alternative remedy available.

Upon hearing both parties and examining the record, the court found that the show cause notice was issued on 26.03.2022, and the petitioner filed a reply on 27.03.2022. Since the impugned order was passed after considering the petitioner's reply, the court held that the petitioner was given an opportunity of hearing. The court also noted that the failure to consider all grounds in the reply does not warrant interference under Article 226/227 and can be addressed through the statutory appeal process under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Given that the petition was filed within 20 days of the assessment order and the petitioner has a further 30 days to file a statutory appeal, the court disposed of the writ petition, declining interference in the impugned order.

---