Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Mastercard Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. exemption application received (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. counsel's argument on stay of assessment orders (Para 4) |
| 3. notice issued to respondents (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. court's position on assessment order stay (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. order disposition and instructions (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--The hearing has been done by way of video conferencing.
CM APPL. 32749/2021
2. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, application stands disposed of.
CM APPL. 32748/2021
3. Present application has been filed seeking stay of passing of final/draft assessment order pursuant to the AAR Ruling No. 1573/2014 dated 06th June, 2018 for Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 during the pendency of the present writ petition.
4. Mr. Salve, learned senior counsel for the petitioner-applicant states that though this Court by way of interim orders dated 12th October, 2018 and 05th October, 2019 had stayed the passing of the final assessment orders pursuant to AAR Ruling till the pendency of the writ petition, yet the Assessing Officer is insisting on passing of final orders for the Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 forthwith and not later than 30th
The court upheld the principle of consistency by maintaining existing stay orders against final assessments pending a writ petition, emphasizing compliance in tax deposits.
The court emphasized the necessity for reasoned decisions in tax proceedings to uphold procedural fairness and accountability.
The court held that an assessment officer cannot re-initiate proceedings after a case has been concluded, as it renders the officer functus officio.
The court emphasized the importance of jurisdiction and the inadvertent issuance of conflicting assessment orders, leading to the quashing of the impugned assessment order dated 15th June, 2021.
The central legal point established is that the Assessing Officer must adhere to the mandatory requirement of passing and forwarding a draft assessment order to the Assessee before passing a final as....
Final assessment orders under the Income Tax Act require a prior draft assessment order as mandated by Section 144C(1) to ensure jurisdictional validity.
The court upheld the authority's decision to grant a stay subject to a 10% deposit, emphasizing the need for procedural propriety in stay applications.
Authority to hear appeals and the need for a personal hearing prior to deciding a stay application are established commitments under the Income Tax Act.
Assessment orders must uphold principles of natural justice, ensuring affected parties have a reasonable opportunity to respond, particularly in cases involving technical barriers to communication.
Violation of principles of natural justice due to failure to provide a reasonable opportunity to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice and draft assessment order.
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
