Income Tax Notices Quashed for 2015-16: Court Cites Violation of Natural Justice, Orders Reconsideration by Respondent.

The HC quashed the impugned notices and orders issued under the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2015-16, citing a violation of natural justice principles due to disputed service of notices. The matter was remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration, allowing the petitioner to file responses and documents, ensuring a fair opportunity to contest the proceedings. The respondent was instructed to provide a reasonable opportunity for the petitioner to be heard, proceeding in accordance with the law.

---

---

Issues:
Petition seeking writ of Certiorari to quash various notices and orders under the Income Tax Act for assessment year 2015-16. Dispute over service of notices. Violation of principles of natural justice alleged. Petitioner's failure to respond to notices. Court's decision on setting aside the impugned order and remitting the matter back for reconsideration.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a petition seeking writs of Certiorari to quash multiple notices and orders issued under the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner contended that the notices were not received as they were not delivered to his personal email ID, and the email ID on the efiling portal belonged to an Income Tax Practitioner. The petitioner argued that the failure to receive the notices violated principles of natural justice. In response, the revenue contended that the petitioner had been duly served and informed about the notices and orders. The court noted the dispute regarding the service of notices but highlighted that the petitioner had not submitted any response or contested the proceedings, leading to the impugned order. Despite the dispute, the court decided to adopt a justice-oriented approach and provide the petitioner with another opportunity to respond and contest the proceedings.

The court, considering the circumstances, set aside the impugned order and subsequent notices and orders, remitting the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration. The court emphasized the need to allow the petitioner to submit responses, documents, and contest the proceedings from the stage of the initial notice issuance. Consequently, the court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned notices and orders, and remitted the matter back to the respondents for reconsideration from the initial notice stage. The petitioner was granted liberty to file pleadings and documents before the respondent, who was directed to provide a reasonable and sufficient opportunity for the petitioner to be heard and proceed in accordance with the law.

---