Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2022 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 1473 - HC - Income TaxProcedural irregularity - lack of opportunity of personal hearing, prior to the framing of assessment - violation of the principles of natural justice - According to the respondent, the website of the income tax department specifically provides for a link that has to be activated for availing of an opportunity of personal hearing. The petitioner has not activated the link, and thus, the question of personal hearing does not arise - HELD THAT - In our considered view, this cannot constitute a fatal flaw that would stand in the way of an effective and efficacious opportunity of hearing. Admittedly the petitioner has sought an opportunity of hearing in the written submissions filed and this constitutes a legitimate request that cannot be brushed aside by the authorities. The contention of the respondents is rejected and the impugned order set aside. The assessment shall be framed after affording adequate opportunity to the petitioner in line with the following directions. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are additional written submissions to be made and seeks liberty to file additional written submissions, for which, learned Senior Standing Counsel does not express any objection. Hence, the petitioner is permitted to upload its written submissions along with any other supporting materials, if any, within a period of four (4) weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of the additional written submissions and materials, if any, a link for personal hearing shall be sent to the petitioner, the petitioner heard and orders passed within a period of four (4) weeks from date of conclusion of personal hearing. For the aforesaid purpose, the respondent shall open the portal forthwith for a period of four (4) weeks, so as to enable the petitioner to file its additional written submissions to the show cause notice.
Issues Involved:
1. Violation of principles of natural justice. 2. Lack of opportunity for personal hearing. 3. Insufficient time for compliance with show cause notices. 4. Procedural irregularities in the e-assessment scheme. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice: The common grievance across the writ petitions is the violation of the principles of natural justice during the framing of assessments. The petitioners consistently argued that they were not provided with an adequate opportunity for personal hearing despite specific requests. The court emphasized that any legitimate request for a personal hearing must be honored by the authorities, irrespective of whether the petitioner activated the dedicated link for such a hearing. The court found that the respondents' failure to provide personal hearings constituted a violation of natural justice, leading to the setting aside of the impugned orders. 2. Lack of Opportunity for Personal Hearing: In several cases, the petitioners highlighted that they had expressly requested a personal hearing in their written submissions, but no such opportunity was granted. For instance, in W.P.No.12760 of 2021, the petitioner sought a personal hearing via written submissions, but the request was ignored. Similarly, in W.P.No.12994 of 2021, the petitioner's request for a personal hearing was not honored, leading to the court setting aside the assessment order. The court consistently held that a failure to provide a personal hearing when requested is a significant procedural flaw. 3. Insufficient Time for Compliance with Show Cause Notices: The court noted instances where the time provided for compliance with show cause notices was inadequate. For example, in W.P.No.13025 of 2021, the petitioner was given only one day to respond to a detailed show cause notice, which was deemed clearly inadequate. The court held that proper opportunity must be afforded to the petitioner to respond to such notices and set aside the impugned orders due to insufficient time for compliance. 4. Procedural Irregularities in the E-Assessment Scheme: The court identified several procedural irregularities in the implementation of the e-assessment scheme. For instance, in W.P.No.13069 of 2021, the petitioner faced confusion and delays during the scheduled personal hearing, which was not conducted as promised. The court found that the procedural flaws, including the failure to conduct personal hearings and the inadequate handling of adjournment requests, constituted a gross violation of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and directions were issued to rectify the procedural lapses. Conclusion: The court allowed all the writ petitions, setting aside the impugned orders due to the identified procedural flaws and violations of natural justice. The respondents were directed to provide adequate opportunities for personal hearings, enable the petitioners to upload additional written submissions, and follow proper procedures in compliance with the principles of natural justice. The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to statutory timelines and ensuring fair hearings in the e-assessment process.
|