9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 210X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me for the Assessment Year 2018-19 on 05.10.2018. A show-cause notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act was issued on 20.03.2022 asking the petitioner to submit the response on or before 27.03.2022. The petitioner sought 15 days time to file objections explaining the reasons for such an adjournment on 20.03.2022. According to the petitioner, his objections to the show-cause notice are under preparation and his tax consultant is extremely busy in filing return of income-tax assessment which were getting time barred on 31.03.2022. He therefore sought adjournment of atleast 15 days to file objections to the issuance of notice under Section-148A of the Act. This was never replied to and an E-mail was received from the respondent on 05.04.2022 at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh the revenue chose not to reply to the request of grant of 15 days, and suddenly on 05.04.2022 chooses to grant the time of 24 hours and insist on the reply of the petitioner to be filed. There was a specific request made of 15 days on the ground that the tax consultant was busy in time barring assessment proceedings. The revenue chose not to reply to the same on 27.03.2022. It never replied to the petitioner for it to know whether there has been any positive note to its request for adjournment and all of a sudden, on 05.04.2022, it chooses to direct the petitioner to file its reply on or before 06.04.2022 when it was not a case of time barring assessment nor was there any urgency for it to not even accede to the request of further three ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld not have been ready by 11.04.2022, the revenue could always contend that the time as per the request of the petitioner was available and yet it was not ready with the answer and in such an eventuality, the Court could have noted the circumstances differently, which is not the case here. Therefore, this needs to be construed and held to be the process which is in violation of the principles natural justice and hence, the order of assessment deserves to be quashed by warranting interference at the hands of the Court. Needless to say that the process is to be initiated from the stage where it has been left. Let the opportunity of personal hearing be granted or intimated to the petitioner. The matter be disposed of in accordance with law. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
