Writ Petition Dismissed: No Violation of Natural Justice in 2016-2017 Assessment Order; Statutory Remedies Still Available.

The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the assessment order for 2016-2017, finding no violation of natural justice principles under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The court concluded that the petitioner was adequately notified and given sufficient opportunities to respond. The petitioner retains the right to pursue statutory remedies, with the limitation period for appeal excluding the time spent on the writ petition.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order for the year 2016-2017 based on violation of natural justice principles under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Violation of Principles of Natural Justice
The petitioner contested the Exhibit-P13 assessment order for the year 2016-2017, alleging it was issued in violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner sold an immovable property in the financial year 2015-16 but failed to file a return for the assessment year 2016-17. The Income Tax Officer issued a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, followed by subsequent notices, including under Section 148. The petitioner argued that the capital gain calculation was erroneous, and the assessment was based on vague information. The petitioner also claimed that the assessment process was not in line with the faceless assessment scheme.

Issue 2: Adequacy of Notices and Opportunities
The respondent pointed out that multiple notices were served on the petitioner physically and via email, with proof of delivery. The petitioner had provided an email address for communication, and responses were submitted through that email ID. The court noted that the petitioner had been granted sufficient opportunities to respond to the notices, including seeking additional time, but failed to do so. The court emphasized that failure to avail opportunities cannot be equated with a lack of opportunity.

Issue 3: Technological Awareness and Opportunity
The court rejected the petitioner's argument of being unaware of the technological mode of serving notices, stating that the petitioner had failed to avail the opportunities granted. The court found no merit in the contention of a violation of natural justice principles, considering the circumstances of the case.

Conclusion
The court dismissed the writ petition, stating it was not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner was granted the liberty to pursue statutory remedies and appeal the decision. The court clarified that the period spent on the writ petition would be excluded from the limitation period for filing an appeal.

---