9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was subsequently revised, declaring a total income of Rs. 20,26,65,360/-. The return was taken up for scrutiny assessment and an intimation under section 143(2) of the Act was also given. Thereafter, petitioner was called upon to furnish the data and documents under section 142(1) of the Act, by notice dated 02.12.2019. A detailed reply was given by the petitioner on 06.12.2019 and again on 11.12.2019. Since nothing was heard from the assessing officer, petitioner alleges that, based upon the replies submitted, it assumed that the assessing officer was satisfied and the assessment was concluded. The belief was fortified by the fact that in the meantime, the assessing officer had issued an order under section 92CA of the Act to the extent of holding that for the year 2017-18, no transfer pricing adjustment was even considered necessary. 4. In the meantime, petitioner was issued with notices for the subsequent assessment year 2018-19 also. Since nothing was heard as regards the assessment year 2017-18, petitioner alleges that it bonafide believed that the proceedings of the year 2017-18, had been concluded. 5. Much later, to the chagrin of the petitioner, it realised that the proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... various glitches in the portal of the income tax department as well as the transition phase of switching into the electronic assessment, bonafide omissions in comprehending the notices resulted in the petitioner being deprived of an opportunity to participate in the proceedings relating to the assessment year 2017-18. 8. Sri. A. Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was a clear failure of an opportunity to contest the assessment proceedings. According to the learned counsel, the aforesaid is evident from the circumstance that during the very same period while petitioner had been participating in the assessment proceedings for another period, i.e., assessment year 2018-19, petitioner was not responding for the assessment year 2017-18. Thus, while the two proceedings were going on simultaneously, petitioner was participating in one assessment year while not responding to the other. The learned counsel asserts that, the absence of participation in one assessment proceeding indicates absence of knowledge of the proceedings. The learned counsel further submitted that, the quantum involved in the present assessment year is also significant that, petitioner would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 05.03.2021, the assessee was called upon to submit the details for the assessment year 2017-18. Since there was no reply from the assessee, a reminder was issued on 17.03.2021, granting the petitioner a final opportunity to reply by 18.03.2021. Even thereafter, when there was no response, a final show-cause notice was issued on 22.03.2021. In the said notice, it was mentioned that if a response is not coming by 25.03.2021, the assessment will be finalised on the basis of the show-cause notice. However, even that notice failed to elicit any reply. Yet again, one more opportunity was granted to the petitioner, after obtaining permission from the superior officers under section 144A of the Act and a final opportunity was granted by issuing another notice on 03.04.2021. Even then, there was no response from the petitioner. 13. The assessing officer again adjourned the case for further consideration to 07.04.2021. Since even by 12.04.2021 there was no response from the petitioner, the provisions of section 145(3) of the Act was invoked and the assessing officer rejected the books of accounts of the assessee, and computed the profits at 8% of the total turnover and calculated the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se, it would have been ideal to have issued notice to the secondary e-mail id also. 17. The technical glitches that surrounded the income tax portal during the said period is also a factor that ought to have weighed with the assessing officer in contemplating issuance of a notice to the secondary e-mail id, especially since, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, this is a high pitched assessment. 18. Viewed in the entire conspectus of the circumstances that surround the order of assessment, this Court is of the opinion that, though the assessing officer cannot be faulted, petitioner did not get an effective opportunity to put forth his response for the year 2017-18. Since the assessment order is the platform from which the rights and obligations of not only the assessee but also of the department arise, it is essential that such a platform is built upon strong foundations, especially when the amount involved is large. The burden of an assessment order issued without hearing the assessee will fall, not only upon the petitioner alone but even upon the system itself and may create further waste of resources. 19. It is relevant to bear in mind that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
