TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1345
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r referred to as the 'JAO') of the petitioner. Respondent no. 2 is the Assessment Unit of the National Faceless Assessment Centre(NFAC), New Delhi which conducted the assessment proceedings of the petitioner upto December 22, 2025 and the respondent no 3 is the Union of India. 3. On November 29, 2024 the petitioner filed its return of income electronically under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on declaring a loss of Rs. 52,27,57,732/-. 4. On January 28,2025 the return of income has been processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru resulting in a refund of Rs. 134,29,45,540/-. Subsequently, on June 3,2025 the petitioner further modified its return of income declaring a loss of Rs. 42,51,35,850/-. 5. On June 24, 2025 the case of the petitioner has been selected for scrutiny assessment pursuant to a notice issued under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the respondent no. 2, namely the Assessment Unit of National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC).Pursuant thereto, the petitioner furnished the requisite preliminary details along with supporting documents vide reply dated July 9, 2025 and July 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s case has been selected for scrutiny Assessment pursuant to a notice issued under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC). 14. It has been submitted that notices under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 have been issued by the NFAC on July 29, 2025 and November 21, 2025 respectively, to which the petitioner duly responded on August 18, 2025 and December16, 2025 respectively. 15. It has further been submitted that, although a survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been conducted at the office premises of the petitioner, the scope of the survey has been entirely focused towards the affairs of its client, Gland Celsus Bio Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. 16. The petitioner further submitted that, during the relevant previous year, no services have been rendered, no invoice has been raised and no fee or income of any nature has been received or accrued from KSK Energy Ventures Ltd in relation to the acquisition. 17. Learned Counsel on behalf of the petitioner submits that on December 22, 2025, the proceedings have been transferred to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) under Section 144B(8) of the Income ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of giving reasonable opportunity of being heard before an order is made, is generally read into the provisions of a statute, particularly when the order has adverse civil consequences for the party affected. The principle will hold good irrespective of whether the power conferred on a statutory body or tribunal is administrative or quasi-judicial." (emphasis supplied) 23. In Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT reported at 193 ITR 321 (SC) and CIT vs Excel Industries Ltd reported at 358 ITR 295 (SC) it has been held that no disallowances on similar issue is called for in view of principles of consistency. 24. Learned counsel places reliance on Godrej Sara Lee Ltd vs Excise and Taxation Officer & Ors reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 95 where the Court has held that7 "4. Before answering the questions, we feel the urge to say a few words on the exercise of writ powers conferred by article 226 of the Constitution having come across certain orders passed by the High Courts holding writ petitions as "not maintainable" merely because the alternative remedy provided by the relevant statutes has not been pursued by the parties desirous of invocation of the writ jurisdiction. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the realm of discretion of the High Courts, writ remedy being discretionary. A writ petition despite being maintainable may not be entertained by a High Court for very many reasons or relief could even be refused to the petitioner, despite setting up a sound legal point, if grant of the claimed relief would not further public interest. Hence, dismissal of a writ petition by a High Court on the ground that the petitioner has not availed the alternative remedy without, however, examining whether an exceptional case has been made out for such entertainment would not be proper." Contention of the Respondent - 25. Per Contra, the learned counsel on behalf of the respondent argues that the assessee has been provided multiple opportunities to produce all relevant documents for the scrutiny assessment, vide notice dated June 24, 2025 under Section 143(2) and subsequent notices under Section 142(1) dated July 29, 2025 and November 21, 2025 issued by the FAO and notices under Section 142(1) dated January 27, 2026, March 6, 2026 and March12,2026 issued by the JAO, but the assessee failed to provide adequate replies along with requisite document in response to such opportunities. 26.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....correct errors of fact, and does not by assuming jurisdiction under Article 226 trench upon an alternative remedy provided by statute for obtaining relief. Where it is open to the aggrieved petitioner to move another tribunal, or even itself in another jurisdiction for obtaining redress in the manner provided by a statute, the High Court normally will not permit by entertaining a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the machinery created under the statute to be bypassed, and will leave the party applying to it to seek resort to the machinery so set up". 31. Learned Counsel has also relied upon a judgment Britannia Industries Limited vs Union of India & Ors reported at 2024 SCC Online Cal 11482 where the Hon'ble Court has held the importance of availment of alternative statutory remedies as opposed to approaching the writ court, and this decision has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in M/s. Britannia Industries Limited vs Union of India & Ors (MAT 2371 of 2024). Analysis- 32. The moot questions involved herein as to- (i) Whether an Assessment Order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with the consequential de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at where replies submitted by the assessee are not properly considered and reasonable opportunity is denied, the assessment order becomes unsustainable. 39. Similarly, in YCD Industries v. National Faceless Assessment Centre, reported at (2021) 437 ITR 119 (Del), it has been held that the Court can set aside the assessment on the ground that the assessee has been denied a meaningful opportunity of hearing. The demand notice and penalty proceedings derive their existence solely from the impugned assessment order. 40. The principles of natural justice are not satisfied by a mere formality of issuing notices. The opportunity contemplated under law must be real, effective and reasonable. An assessee must be informed of the material proposed to be relied upon and must be granted adequate opportunity to controvert the same. 41. Where an assessment order entails serious civil consequences, adherence to the rule of audi alteram partem becomes indispensable. Any order passed in breach thereof stands vitiated. 42. In the present case, the challenge is not merely to the correctness of additions made by the Assessing Officer on merits, the challenge strikes at the very decision-mak....