TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 1384
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ents. 2. By way of the present writ petition, the writ petitioner has assailed the Assessment Order issued under Section 143(3) read with Section 260 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short), issued by respondent No. 1 dated 10.12.2024 for Assessment Year 2018-19. The brief facts leading to filing of the present writ petition are as under: 2.1 The petitioner is engaged in manufacturing of large slabs of ceramic tiles. The petitioner had e-filed the return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 on 30.10.2018 declaring total income of Rs. 19,110/-. Thereafter, the case of the petitioner was selected for scrutiny. The petitioner participated in the assessment proceedings. It i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase of the petitioner has been selected for the Faceless Assessment and the case is assigned to the Assessment Unit. 2.5 The petitioner objected to the sudden change of two officers, and accordingly, uploaded his submissions on the portal and also stated about the short time given to him. On 02.12.2024, respondent No. 1-Faceless Assessment Officer, asked the petitioner to file submissions by 03.12.2024 by issuing a show-cause notice. The petitioner was just given one day time to file his submissions. Since the petitioner was granted one day time to file his reply, and the notice was not appearing on the portal, the petitioner filed a grievance vide e-mail on the same day i.e. 02.12.2024. 2.6 The petitioner, accordingly, drafted the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ondent No. 2 - the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, issued notice to the petitioner and accordingly the petitioner also submitted his replies. He was also heard on 29.11.2024. Thereafter, suddenly respondent No. 1 - Faceless Assessing Officer took over the proceedings and only offered one day time to submit the reply. Thus, it is submitted that the impugned Assessment Order is required to be quashed and set aside on this count. 4. Responding to the submissions, learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Maulin Yajnik appearing for the revenue has submitted that due to technical issues faced by the respondents - Assessing Officers, the assessment was not completed as directed by this Court within a period of 12 weeks. In this regard, he has pla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 28.11.2024, and thereafter, the Assessment Order has been passed on 10.12.2024. 4.2 Thus, it is submitted that due to modifications in the portal and the issues with regard to the transferring of the case, the delay had occurred which ultimately resulted into passing of the Assessment Order beyond the time limit mentioned by this Court. 4.3 Thus, it is urged that the matter may be again remanded to the authorities so that necessary orders can be passed. 5. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties at length. The following facts have established from the documents on record: (1) After the filing of Return of Income by the petitioner on 30.10.2018, the Faceless Assessing Officer (respondent N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Faceless Assessing Officer who was required to issue notice or pass an Assessment Order did not do so, but it was done by the respondent No. 2, the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. Thus, the initial direction of this Court after remanding the matter and directing the Assessing Officer i.e. the Faceless Assessing Officer to pass the fresh order, the proceedings of assessment were undertaken by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. This is the first illegality which the respondents have committed. (4) The respondent No. 2 i.e. the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer issued show-cause notice to the petitioner on 27.11.2024 and also granted personal hearing to the petitioner on 29.11.2024. After this stage, suddenly, respondent No. 1 - F....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t take enough precautions to see that the directions issued by this Court are adhered to. There was no need for respondent No. 2 - Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to intervene in the proceedings and take over the proceedings which were initially undertaken by respondent No. 1 - Faceless Assessing Officer. On this count also the impugned Assessment Order is required to be quashed and set aside. The one day time granted to the petitioner to respond to the show-cause notice and file his reply would in fact, be a violation of the principles of natural justice in wake of the fact that respondent No. 1 who was supposed to issue the show-cause notice at first place did not choose to do so till 02.12.2024 and prior to that from 29.10.2024 to 27.11....