Back
RAJIV SHAKDHER, TARA VITASTA GANJU
Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)
CM Appl.20724/2023
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 5318/2023
2. Issue notice.
2.1. Ms Astu Khandelwal, who appears on behalf of the respondent /UOI, accepts notice.
2.2. Mr Abhishek Maratha, senior standing counsel who appears on behalf of the respondents/revenue, accepts notice.
3. In view of the directions that we propose to pass, counsel for the respondents say that no counter-affidavit is required to be filed, and that they will argue the matter, based on the record currently available with the court.
3.1. Therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal at this stage itself.
4. The principal grievance of the petitioner/assessee is that it has not been given benefit of the provision of Section 10(46) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, "the Act"] qua the Assessment Years (AY) in issue.
5. The petitioner/assessee has filed an application, it appears, in that behalf, which is dated 06.04.2021, followed by multiple reminders for disposal of the same application. These reminders are dated 19.01.2022,
Grant of personal hearing is a mandatory requirement under Section 144B(6)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, and failure to provide such a hearing can result in the setting aside of the assessment order.
Procedural fairness and consideration of petitioner's response in assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act
A personal hearing is essential in tax assessment procedures to ensure administrative fairness; failure to provide one invalidates the assessment orders.
Breach of principles of natural justice in assessment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The court emphasized the importance of the Commissioner of Income Tax to dispose of the petitioner's application and accord a personal hearing, and allowed filing of written submissions. It also prov....
Violation of principles of natural justice and failure to adhere to the timeline given in the notice led to the setting aside of the impugned assessment orders.
Courts may set aside orders when greater latitude should have been granted due to family bereavement, and may direct the filing of a fresh reply and grant a personal hearing.
Compliance with procedural requirements and the right to a fair hearing are essential in proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The importance of factual accuracy in the Assessing Officer's assumptions and the requirement to grant a fair opportunity for a personal hearing influenced the court's decision.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
