Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (1) TMI 29 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 by CIT - assessee denied opportunity of hearing in the present case and that order was passed without considering the reply filed by the assessee - HELD THAT:- Undoubtedly the present proceedings were initiated just 15 days before the expiry of limitation to pass the order u/s. 263 of the Act and the two notices given to the assessee for hearing afforded very short period of time to reply. That the first one given only two days time to reply and the second one four days time - despite the inadequate time given to the assessee to respond, we find that the assessee still managed to file a reply to the Ld. PCIT and even pointed out the reason for not complying with the first notice. But apparently for no reason, his reply was not even considered by the Ld. PCIT when the facts before us clearly demonstrate that they were filed on the ITBA Portal on the specified date and even the PCIT was intimated of the reply filed on the said date. The Revenue has not controverted these facts before us. So for some apparent reason, the PCIT simply chose to ignore the reply filed by the assessee and went ahead to pass the order u/s. 263 of the Act on the very same date, i.e. 23/03/2021. The impugned order, we hold, has not only has been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice but is also in violation of the procedure laid down u/s. 263 of the Act which specifically requires the authorities to pass the order u/s. 263 after affording due opportunity of hearing to the assessee and after making such enquiry as is deemed necessary. In the present case, the Ld. PCIT has neither afforded adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee but by not taking note of the reply, he has not even made necessary enquiries in the present case before passing the impugned order. The order passed, therefore, is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and in view of the various decisions cited by the ld. counsel for the assessee before us, the only recourse is to set aside the same. We have no hesitation, therefore, in holding that the impugned order passed in the present case is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice having been passed in haste without giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee and without even dealing with and considering reply filed by the assessee and the order, therefore, needs to be set aside.
|