TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 247
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... K. Raval for the respondents. 2. By this petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the assessment order dated 11.03.2022 as well as the demand notice of even date for Assessment Year 2015-16 on the ground that though the petitioner has filed a reply to the show cause notice-cum-draft assessment order, the same was not considered and the assessment order was passed noting that the no compliance of the show cause notice was made on part of the petitioner. 3. The brief facts of the case are that for the Assessment Year 2015-16, the petitioner did not file the return of income under Section 139 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (For short 'the Act'). Thereafter, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... it is worth-mentioning that all the above statutory notices and the show-cause notice were electronically issued and served on the e-mail id provided by the assessee. The SCN was also served on the assessee through the Designated Verification Unit through the Insight portal. Till today, there is no compliance to the show cause notice on the part of the assessee." 8. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Tushar Hemani for the petitioner submitted that the Assessing Officer ought to have considered the reply and thereafter passed the impugned assessment order under challenge. He invited the attention of the Court to the averments made in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the petitioner referring to the case history notings in which it is st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e has furnished certain details vide reply dated 10.11.2021 and 04.01.2022, which has been duly considered. However, the reply of the assessee was not found to be acceptable by the Assessing Officer of NaFAC, Delhi. Therefore, a show case notice dated 18/02/2022, the assessee has been asked to furnish certain details to explain the sources of fund as claimed unsecured loan and utilized for purchase of immovable property. In view of the above, the Assessing Officer of NaFAC, Delhi has rightly followed the assessment procedure as mandated by law. Therefore, the contention "impugned order deserves to be quashed" is not sustainable. 9. I humbly submit that on careful consideration of "case history notings", it is seen that the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 10. It is humbly submitted that reassessment proceedings has been started from the issuance of noticed u/s 148 of the Act. Which was issued on 31.03.2021. Hence, sufficient time were available with the assessee to represent the case properly. The opportunity of Personal hearing was also available by way of video conference. However, on perusal of case history notings, the assessee is aggrieved by the order of the AO of NaFAC, Delhi, it has the option to file appeal before first appellate authority. The above contention of the assessee is futile." 10. Referring to the above averments, it was submitted that the Assessing Officer was justified in passing the impugned assessment order as the petitioner assessee failed to file reply within....