TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1532
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd that the first notice under Section 148-A(b) of the Act for A.Y. 2016-17 was issued to the petitioner on 22.03.2023. Issued through manual mode, the petitioner claims, it was not served on him. That objection apart, it cannot be disputed that the said notice was not uploaded on the web portal of the revenue. Thereafter, on 31.03.2023 order under Section 148-A(d) of the Act was passed to initiate the reassessment proceedings against the petitioner, for A.Y. 2016-17. Nine months thereafter, for the first time on 04.01.2024 the said order was uploaded on the web portal. Yet, the jurisdictional notice under Section 148 was issued to the petitioner on 31.03.2023 through electronic mode. It is at that stage that the petitioner gained knowledge of the proceeding initiated against it. 4. In such circumstances, the petitioner filed objections to the initiation of the re-assessment proceedings including as to the ex parte order dated 31.03.2023 passed under Section 148-A(d) of the Act. Those objections filed on 16.03.2024 were rejected on 20.03.2024. 5. Thereafter, it is beyond comprehension how the assessing authority proceeded to pass the re-assessment order on the next day i.e. 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Reading of the two provisions does not suggest that grant of opportunity of personal hearing is optional at the discretion of the Assessing Officer. On the contrary in the context of rights in dispute before the Assessing Officer and under the Scheme of the Act, providing for opportunity of personal hearing appears to be the Rule and its waiver an exception to be exercised by the assessee. Wherever the assessee makes a specific request in terms of Section 144B(vii), that would be enforced on the Assessing Authority through National Faceless Assessment Centre in accordance with Section 144B(6)(viii). However, the provision cannot be read to mean that opportunity of personal hearing may be granted only where the assessee specifically requests for the same. 6. There is no warrant to interpret that the processual law prescribes that opportunity of personal hearing may not be granted by the Assessing Authority unless specifically requested for by the petitioner, in writing. To do that would be to give meaning to the word "request" used under Section 144B(6)(vii) and (viii), larger and much wider than intended by the legislature. Under the general Scheme of the Act, assessment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he explanation that the assessee may have furnished to the tentative opinion of the Assessing Officer. Only after such reasons are drawn and recorded in the assessment order, the assessee may have opportunity to know the mind of the Assessing Officer. He may then make an informed decision to either accept the reasoning and pay up the tax or approach the appeal forum. 10. Here, we may also take note of an earlier amendment made to Section 251 of the Act whereby the power of the first appeal authority to "set aside" a defective assessment order and to remit the matter to the Assessing Officer, has been done away. At present, the first appeal authorities may either "confirm" or "reduce" or "enhance" or "annul" an assessment order. In absence of power to remit the matter to the assessing authority to make a fresh assessment, in the case of an ex parte order wrongly drawn on ex parte basis, the appeal power would remain seriously restricted. The appeal authority would be forced to entertain the appeal on all merit issues and exercise the powers of the Assessing Officer. While it is not in doubt that the appeal authority has all powers of Assessing Officer, at the same time, it ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....explanation to the course adopted by the assessing authority. Copy of the written instructions have been marked as 'X' and retained on record. In light of the above, no useful purpose may be served in keeping the present petition pending or calling for a counter affidavit or to relegate the petitioner to the forum of appeal. As discussed above, that appeal if filed will only require the Appeal Authority to function as the Assessing Authority in light of the amendment made in Section 251 of the Act. That a part on first principle - where rules of natural justice have been completely violated, we may never allow such an order to stand." 10. In the present facts, as noted above, first notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act was not served in the manner provided. Second, the order u/s 148A(d) was initially not served. Later, it was served with delay of nine months. Even if it is assumed that the objections to jurisdiction (raised by the petitioner), had been rejected on 20.03.2024, there existed no justifiable situation or circumstance as may have allowed the assessing authority (whether faceless or otherwise) - to pass the re-assessment order on the next day, without issuing any furt....