Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
Veena Madan – Appellant
Versus
Income-Tax Officer – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging assessment order under income tax act (Para 1) |
| 2. court's reluctance to interfere in assessment (Para 2) |
| 3. permitting appeal filing and expediting decision (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral):
1. Present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the assessment order dated 7th December, 2019 passed under Section 147 read with 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short `Act'), the penalty orders dated 15th March, 2022 passed under Section 271(1)(c), 271(1)(b) and 271F of the Act for the Assessment Year 2012-13.
2. A perusal of the paper book reveals that petitioner has already filed an appeal before the CIT(A) challenging the impugned assessment order. Consequently, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned assessment order in the writ jurisdiction.
3. Since the time period for filing the appeal to challenge the penalty orders has expired, this Court permits the petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate authority challenging the penalty orders within two weeks. In the event, the said appeal is filed within two weeks, the same shall not be dismissed on the ground of limitation.
4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (App
A writ court will respect the appellate process and permit filing of late appeals against penalties without dismissing on grounds of limitation.
An assessment order finalized without allowing objections to a draft constitutes a jurisdictional defect, rendering the order invalid.
The court established that an assessment order must consider the taxpayer's responses as part of the mandatory procedure required by law, failure of which renders the order invalid.
The assessment order is to be passed only after considering the reply of the assessee as per Section 144B(1)(xxiv) of the Income Tax Act, and failure to do so constitutes a violation of the mandatory....
An assessment order passed without compliance with procedural requirements of the Income Tax Act is invalid and must be set aside.
The court upheld administrative discretion of tax authorities and directed prompt resolution of appeals, emphasizing the separation of case merits from procedural timelines.
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
