Right to Personal Hearing requires respondents to consider taxpayer's reply and grant hearing before initiating prosecution action.

Whether adjudicatory steps including initiation of prosecution under the Income Tax Act can proceed without affording a personal hearing and considering the taxpayer's reply was determinative; the court held respondents must consider the petitioner's reply dated 20.06.2023 and grant a personal hearing before taking any coercive or prosecutorial action, and thereafter decide the matter afresh on the merits and in light of judgments placed before it.

---

---

Issues: Whether the show cause notice dated 03.05.2023 and subsequent email dated 28.09.2023 seeking particulars and proposing prosecution under provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 can be quashed without providing the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing and without considering the petitioner's reply of 20.06.2023.

Analysis: The petition challenges a notice requesting particulars and intimating possible prosecution for alleged belated remittance of TDS. The records show the petitioner filed a reply dated 20.06.2023 and the respondents subsequently communicated by email offering a final opportunity to furnish details. The Court examined whether adjudicatory action, including any decision on initiating prosecution, was taken without affording a personal hearing and without considering the petitioner's earlier reply. In view of the factual sequence and the parties' submissions, the Court found that the respondents should consider the petitioner's reply and afford a personal hearing before taking any coercive or prosecutorial step.

Conclusion: The Court directed the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's reply dated 20.06.2023, grant a personal hearing to the petitioner who shall produce necessary documents, and thereafter decide the matter afresh taking into account the judgments produced before the Court. The writ petition is disposed of by directing consideration and hearing; no costs.

---