Assessment Orders for 2014-16 Overturned Due to Natural Justice Violation; Fresh Orders Required in 3 Months Under IT Act.

The HC set aside the impugned Assessment Orders for the years 2014-2015 and 2015-2016, citing a violation of natural justice principles. The cases were remitted for fresh orders within three months, emphasizing the necessity for draft Assessment Orders under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ensuring procedural fairness.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging Assessment Orders for 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Violation of principles of natural justice. Petitioner's entitlement under Section 144B for draft Assessment Orders.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed writ petitions challenging Assessment Orders for the years 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner had not filed regular income tax returns for the Assessment Year 2014-2015, leading to a notice under Section 148 of the Act. Notices were issued under Section 142(1) of the Act for both years, requesting specific documents. The petitioner faced issues uploading documents due to technical difficulties, prompting a Grievance Petition. The petitioner argued that Assessment Orders were passed without allowing document uploads, seeking another opportunity. Additionally, the petitioner claimed entitlement to two draft Assessment Orders under Section 144B, citing a previous court decision for support.

In response, the Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents contended that the petitioner had been given multiple opportunities through various notices, implying the writ petitions lacked merit. The counsel also highlighted the petitioner's alternative remedy before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 248 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. However, the Court acknowledged a violation of natural justice principles, leading to the setting aside of the impugned orders. The cases were remitted back for fresh orders within three months to balance the parties' interests.

The Court found a violation of natural justice principles, leading to the setting aside of the impugned orders. The cases were remitted back for fresh orders within three months to balance the parties' interests. The decision highlighted the importance of adhering to procedural requirements, emphasizing the need for draft Assessment Orders before final assessments. The judgment aimed to ensure fairness and compliance with legal provisions while addressing the petitioner's concerns regarding document uploads and entitlement to draft Assessment Orders.

---