TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (6) TMI 198
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....riod, the hospital must commence operation. 2. The petitioner claims that he had set up a hospital in Nilgiri Therku Thottam Village, Thanjavur Taluk and District, to help the rural people. He purchased land for a total consideration of Rs. 1,20,79,000/-, under registered sale deeds. He also obtained a loan for a sum of Rs. 7,00,00,000/- at the rate of 11% interest for construction of the hospital from HDFC Limited, Madurai. Overdraft amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- at the rate of 9.7% interest was also sanctioned for purchasing the infrastructure required for the said hospital. He also obtained a further loan of Rs. 7,21,64,000/- at the rate of 12.5% interest on 11.09.2013 from HDFC Bank, Chennai, for purchase of Elekta Linac, infrastructure fund and OD facility. The hospital was constructed in accordance with the approved building plan. It commenced to function from 05.01.2013 in the name of "Meenakshi Hospital". 3. The petitioner claimed that he filed his original written of income admitting an income of Rs. 1,30,98,160/- on 30.09.2014. A search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act was conducted at the petitioner's residence on 26.11.2014. The return of income filed by the pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Ramesh learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.S.Srimathy learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents. 10. The learned Senior Counsel stated that for the assessment years 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015-2016, the petitioner having grievance over the order of assessment made by the Assessing Officer, namely, the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai Circle-1, Madurai, had filed appeals under Section 246 (A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the Appellate Authority, namely, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-19, Chennai), Chennai. 11. The learned Senior Counsel stated that the said authority had examined the assessment order and had passed a detailed order allowing the said appeal. The Appellate Authority had also stated that the Assessing Officer was not justified in restricting the assessee's claim of deduction under Section 80-1B(11C) of the Income Tax Act to the extent of 75%, 50% and 25% with respect to the assessment years 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 respectively. The Appellate Authority had directed that the Assessing Officer should give 100% deduction, on the basis of the announcement by the Finance Minister that five year....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad actually stated that an order admitting a writ petition for hearing or granting an interim order on the facts and circumstances of the case, is not a final decision. It has also been stated that it does not lay down any principle of law which is binding. In paragraph No.12, reference has been made to AIR 1987 SC 1345 (Bir Bajrang Kumar Vs., State of Bihar), (referred supra). The Hon'ble Supreme Court had reiterated the necessity of giving identical treatment, in cases involving identical points by the Courts and also stated that if the cases are before two different seats of the same High Court and it is not practical to hear both the cases together then if one of the cases is decided, then, that decision would act as the precedent to other case. 15. In the instant case, the earlier writ petitions have not been decided finally. Only interim order had been granted. The learned Senior Counsel stated that while granting interim order, the learned single Judge of this Court had examined the issue of violation of principles of natural justice and also violation of promissory estoppel held over by the Finance Minister in his budget speech in the Parliament, pursuant to which, Sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Industries Limited and others Vs., Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi and another, wherein, a principle was laid down that if an appeal had been preferred against the order of assessment passed by the Income Tax Officer under Sections 143 and 144 and the order had been modified pursuant to the assessment order, that will clearly not be an order under Sections 143 and 144 simpliciter. A regular assessment is completed as soon as the Income Tax Officer passes an order assessing the total income or loss of the assessee and determining the sum payable by him or refundable to him within the period prescribed by sub-Section (1) of Section 153. There is no provision for making modification or variation pursuant to an order of the higher authority in Sections 143 or 144 of the Act. Therefore, the learned Judge observed that invoking Section 115 JC of the assessment order it had violated the principles of natural justice and granted stay. 21. In the instant case, the assessment order has been straight away challenged before this Court. The writ petitioner had not filed any appeal, even though the law provides him opportunity to do so. He had chosen the alternate method of coming before this....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has indulged in what can be loosly termed as fraudulent transactions. 24. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer had examined the returns of the petitioner herein. The returns of income for the year 2017-2018 was filed on 28.09.2017. When it was taken up for scrutiny, notice under Section 143 (2) was issued and was also served. There was a search of the place of the assessee also. After the search, it was found that one M/s.Sowdambika Traders ADV having office at 47, Trichy Bye Pass Road, Sukkaliyur Post, Karur were said to have supplied medical equipments/instruments to Meenakshi Hospital, Thanjavur, for a sum of Rs. 2,32,79,760/-. This was debited in the accounts of the hospital in the name of Sowdambika Traders. It was found that the payment for the purchase of the said medical equipments was paid by demand draft. It was however noted that though payment had been made for a huge sum of Rs. 2,32,00,000/-, the details of the medical equipments were not disclosed by the assessee. Statements were recorded from the Officials in the Financial Department. It was also found after enquiry that M/s.Sowdambika Traders, whose address was given as No.47, Trichy Bye Pass Road, Sukkal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Vs. Union of India (1999 (6) SCC 237), there can be certain situations in which an order passed in violation of natural justice need not be set aside under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. For example where no prejudice is caused to the person concerned, interference under Article 226 is not necessary. Similarly, if the quashing of the order which is in breach of natural justice is likely to result in revival of another order which is in itself illegal as in Gadde Venkateswara Rao vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh [1966 (2) SCR 172 = AIR 1966 SC 828], it is not necessary to quash the order merely because of violation of principles of natural justice. 22. In M.C.Mehta {1999} 6 SCC 237 it was pointed out that at one time, it was held in Ridge vs. Baldwin ( 1964 AC 40) that breach of principles of natural justice was in itself treated as prejudice and that no other 'defacto' prejudice needed to be proved. But, since then the rigour of the rule has been relaxed not only in England but also in our country. In S.L. Kapoor Vs. Jagmohan (1980 (4) SCC 379), Chinnappa Reddy, J. followed Ridge vs. Baldwin and set aside the order of supercession of the New Delhi Metropolitan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....clusion" referred to above,- there has been considerable debate of the application of that theory in other cases. The divergent views expressed in regard to this theory have been elaborately considered by this Court in M.C. Mehta referred to above. This Court surveyed the views expressed in various judgments in England by Lord Reid, Lord Wilberforce, Lord Woolf, Lord Bingham, Megarry, J. and Straughton L.J. etc. in various cases and also views expressed by leading writers like Profs. Garner, Craig, De. Smith, Wade, D.H. Clark etc. Some of them have said that orders passed in violation must always be quashed for otherwise the Court will be prejudging the issue. Some others have said, that there is no such absolute rule and prejudice must be shown. Yet, some others have applied via-media rules. We do not think it necessary, in this case to go deeper into these issues. In the ultimate analysis, it may depend on the facts of a particular case." 31.The same position had been reiterated in 2006 (8) SCC 647 [Punjab National Bank and Others]: "In an industrial dispute referred to by the Central Government which has an all-India implication, individual workman cannot be made parties to a....