2024 (4) TMI 987

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... illegal, arbitrary and without authority of law. The challenge to the said order is also on the ground of the same being in violative of the principles of natural justice. 2. Heard Mr. S.Ravi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vijhay K. Punna, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department appearing for the respondents. 3. Alleging non-compliance of the principles of natural justice, it was contended by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the entire proceedings were commenced with issuance of a show cause notice to the petitioner on 17.03.2022 to which the petitioner gave a reply on 19.03.2022. Thereafter, the final order stood passed on 30.03.2022 which goes to show that there was an undue haste....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o the contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that since the dispute was in respect of the assessment year 2014-2015, the show cause notice was issued after so long a period on 17.03.2022. The respondent authorities ought to have given a reasonable period of time rather than hastily proceeding and concluding the entire proceedings in less than fifteen (15) days time which goes to show the arbitrariness and pre[1]determined approach of the respondent authorities in passing of the impugned order. 7. According to the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner the minimum period required upon issuing draft assessment order and enabling the assessee to file his objections is thirty (30) days which in the present case has been....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncome Tax Department, what also is not very clear is, whether after the reply which the petitioner had submitted on 19.03.2022, the respondent authorities did they ever issue any show cause notice to the assessee for any further proceedings drawn beyond the reply to the show cause notice which the petitioner had already filed. There is no proof of any notice of personal hearing or any other hearing calling upon the petitioner to personally make his submissions. 11. Another aspect which needs to be considered is that from submissions made on either side and on perusal of the pleadings, what is prima facie revealed is that during the assessment year 2014-2015 there was in fact no purchase of shares made and unless and until there was proof o....