IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Umkal Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
National Faceless Assessment Centre & Anr. - Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 7166 of 2021; C.M. Appls No. 22632 of 2021, 22633 of 2021
Decided On : 29-07-2021
Faceless Assessment - Jurisdiction - Section 143(3) read with Section 144B - [Section 143(3), Section 144B]
Fact of the Case:
The petition challenges the Assessment Order dated 09th June 2021 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Act for Assessment Year 2018-19, alleging lack of jurisdiction and violation of principles of natural justice.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned assessment order was passed without affording personal hearing, violating the principles of natural justice and the mandatory procedure prescribed in the Faceless Assessment Scheme under Section 144B of the Act.
Issues: Violation of principles of natural justice and mandatory procedure under the Faceless Assessment Scheme.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Section 144B(7) provides for an opportunity of personal hearing if requested by the assessee, and failure to grant such hearing would result in a violation of the principles of natural justice and the mandatory procedure under the Faceless Assessment Scheme.
Final Decision: The impugned assessment order and all proceedings initiated pursuant thereto for the assessment year 2018-19 were set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer to grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a reasoned order in accordance with the law.
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. - The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the Assessment Order dated 09th June 2021 passed by the Respondents under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Act for Assessment Year [AY] 2018-19 as well as notice of demand issued under Section 156 of the Act and all proceedings initiated pursuant thereto.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the impugned order dated 09th June 2021 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Act, for the assessment year 2018-19 is without jurisdiction, arbitrary, illegal and deserves to be quashed. He states that the impugned order dated 09th June 2021 was passed without affording personal hearing, even when, specifically requested by the Petitioner and hence, the impugned order is violative of the principles of natural justice and Section 144B of the Act.
4. He points out that as against the draft assessment order dated 08th April 2021, the Petitioner had filed a response, therefore in terms of clause (xxiii)(b) of section 144B, the response was required to be sent to the assessment unit and the assessment unit was to pass a revised draft order.
He contends that the Revised draft order under clause (xxiv) to section 144B of the Act was not prepared. He emphasises that the final assessment order is virtually a copy of draft assessment order dated 08th April 2021.
5. Issue notice. Mr. Sunil Agarwal, learned senior standing counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents. He submits that the expression used in clause (vii) of sub-Section (7) of Section 144B of the Act is 'may' and not 'shall' and therefore, there is no vested right in the petitioner to claim a personal hearing.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that Section 144B (7) provides for an opportunity of personal hearing, if requested, by the assessee. The relevant portions of Section 144B (7) and Section 144B (9) are reproduced hereinbelow: -
"144B. Faceless assessment -
(1) xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
(7) For the purposes of faceless assessment-
xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
(vii) in a case where a variation is proposed in the draft assessment order or final draft assessment order or revised draft assessment order, and an opportunity is provided to the assessee by serving a notice calling upon him to show-cause as to why the assessment should not be completed as per the such draft or final draft or revised draft assessment order, the assessee or his authorised representative, as the case may be, may request for personal hearing so as to make his oral submissions or present his case before the income-tax authority in any unit;
(viii) the Chief Commissioner or the Director General, in charge of the Regional Faceless Assessment Centre, under which the concerned unit is set up, may approve the request for personal hearing referred to in clause (vii) if he is of the opinion that the request is covered by the circumstances referred to in sub-clause (h) of clause (xii);
xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
(xii) the Principal Chief Commissioner or the Principal Director General, in charge of the National Faceless Assessment Centre shall, with the prior approval of the Board, lay down the standards, procedures and processes for effective functioning of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Regional Faceless Assessment Centres and the unit set up, in an automated and mechanised environment, including format, mode, procedure and processes in respect of the following, namely: -
xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
(h) circumstances in which personal hearing referred to clause
(viii) shall be approved;....
xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
(9) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, assessment made under sub-section (3) of section 143 or under section 144 in the cases referred to in subsection (2) [other than the cases transferred under sub-section (8)], on or after the 1st day of April, 2021, shall be non est if such assessment is not
Failure to grant an opportunity of personal hearing as required under Section 144B(7) constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice and the mandatory procedure under the Faceless Asses....
The court held that failure to grant a personal hearing, when requested, violates principles of natural justice, rendering the assessment order invalid under Section 144B.
The court emphasized the importance of granting the petitioner an opportunity of hearing as required by Section 144B(7) of the Income Tax Act, and held that the failure to do so violated the principl....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the assessee as per the provisions of Section 144B (7) and the mandatory proced....
A taxpayer's request for a personal hearing under Section 144B must be considered by the revenue authority, and failure to do so violates natural justice, rendering the assessment order null.
The court ruled that the failure to provide a personal hearing upon request in the faceless assessment process violated principles of natural justice, rendering the assessment order invalid.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of affording a personal hearing in case of a proposed variation in the assessment order, as provided in Section 144B(7) of ....
The court emphasized the obligation of the revenue to consider the request for a personal hearing and to frame standards, procedures, and processes for approving such requests under Section 144B(7) o....
The court upheld the necessity of granting a personal hearing under Section 144B(7) of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing that natural justice principles must be respected in assessment processes.
The failure to grant a personal hearing during assessments constitutes a violation of natural justice, mandating the setting aside of the impugned orders.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.