TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 495
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the Assessment Order dated 27.04.2021 for Assessment Year 2018-19 on ground of breach of principles of natural justice. 5. The brief facts of the case are as under : 5.1. The petitioner is a legal heir of late one Junedbhai Abdulgani Memon (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') who expired on 05.05.2020. 5.2. Late Junedbhai Abdulgani Memon filed return of income on 31.12.2018 declaring total income of Rs. 3,48,780/- for Assessment Year 2018-19. 5.3. Thereafter, the case was taken up for scrutiny and notice under Section 143 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') was issued on 28.09.2019 followed by notice under Section 142 (1) of the Act. 5.4. The respondent thereafter issued the notices on 12.12.2019, 30.01.2020, 24.07.2020 and 31.08.2020 under Section 142 (1) of the Act in name of late Junedbhai Abdulgani Memon-husband of the petitioner. Such notices were issued upon the previous authorised representative of the assessee on Email ID being [email protected] which was not verified and due to ill health of the assessee, he also could not visit the Office of the authorised representative d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 5.9. Thus, it is apparent from the records that the impugned Assessment Order dated 27.04.2021 is passed by the respondent-Assessing Officer in violation of the principles of natural justice by not providing the opportunity of hearing as contemplated under Section 144B(1)(vii) of the Act. 6. Learned advocate Mr. Varis Isani for the petitioner therefore submitted that the impugned Assessment Order may be quashed and set aside and the matter may be remanded back to the Assessing Officer to provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, pass a fresh de-novo order. 7.1. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Maithili Mehta appearing for the respondent-Authority referred to the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondent and more particularly, the order-sheets annexed thereto. Reply is also filed in response to the order passed by this Court (Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala as His Lordship Was Then and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nisha M. Thakore) on 25.01.2022 on seven queries raised therein. The order dated 25.01.2022 reads as under : "1. We have heard Mr.Varis Isani, the learned counsel appearing for the wr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder? (3) In the response through a mail to an adjournment request, what does the word "null" mean ? Whether this means adjournment is granted, if yes, till which date is the adjournment granted? (4) Whether the Department still follows this pattern and language when it comes to replying to a request for adjournment by an Assessee? (5) Whether the Department responds to any adjournment request by giving next date? (6) Whether any documents can be uploaded on the Portal after the last specified date of the draft assessment order? (7) When the assessee has filed detailed submissions pursuant to notices u/s 142 (1)/143 (2), opportunity of personal hearing is still required to be mandatorily given?" 7. Let Notice be issued to the respondent, returnable on 15th February 2022. Let there be an ad-interim order in terms of para 7(b). 8. On the returnable date, we expect the C.B.D.T. to clarify on all the aforesaid issues by way of an affidavit-in-reply or otherwise." 7.2. The respondent therefore, has provided the answers to each of the questions as under in the additional affidavit-in-reply filed in the month of April, 2025 as under : "Q.1 What is the normal time granted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reference) of the case it can be seen that on 23.03.2021, the assessee sought opportunity of personal hearing. On 30.03.2021 letter was issued to the assessee vide DIN No. ITBA/AST/F//17/2020-21/1031915686(1) to formally apply for V. C., as per the procedure prescribed. Thereafter V. C. was accorded through video conferencing scheduled vide V.C. notice dtd. 16.04.2021 fixing V. C. on 22.04.2021 at 12.00 PM (copy enclosed), which was not attended by the assessee (Ref. order sheet entry dtd. 23.04.2021). Therefore, the AO passed order u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act on 27.04.2021. However, it is not clear as to which communication shows the NULL value, as the same is not visible to Assessing Officer. Q.4 Whether the Department still follows this pattern and language when it comes to replying to a request for adjournment by an Assessee? Ans. Same as 3 above. Q.5 Whether the Department responds to any adjournment request by giving next date? Ans. Yes, as per Para, E of SOP for AU dated-03.08.2022 (SOP attached) Where adjournment is granted, AU to ensure that adequate time is given to the assessee to respond: Adjournment up to 7 days where assessee seeks adjournment using th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....request submission date whichever is later." 7.5. It was therefore submitted that henceforth, the assessee is provided sufficient time of fifteen days to submit the reply and the adjournments are granted subject to the conditions mentioned above. 7.6. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Maitili Mehta also invited the attention of the Court to the order-sheet annexed at Page No. 185 to demonstrate that after issuance of show-cause notice dated 12.04.2021, the assessment order was approved on 23.04.2021 without taking into consideration the adjournment request made by the petitioner on 20th April, 2021. It was pointed out from the Notings at page No.185 that show-cause notice to draft assessment order was issued on 16.03.2021 and the petitioner has filed the reply in response to the show-cause notice and sought for personal hearing and accordingly, the video conferencing was scheduled on 22.04.2021 but the assessee did not turn up. It was therefore also pointed out that the adjournment request which is placed on record by the petitioner on 20th April, 2021 was not within the knowledge of the assessment unit and accordingly, the impugned assessment order was passed. 8. Considering ....