Partnership dispute as a reason for denial of accessibility to company's records and petitioner's apprehension of being denied the right of statutory appeal.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the file of the first respondent and quash the impugned order in PAN:AABFG3045J, dated 30.03.2022 in DIN:ITBA/ AST/ 147/ 2021-2022/ 1042064473 (1) passed by the first respondent under Section 147 read with Section 144 and 144 B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2017-2018.)

1.The petitioner filed this writ petition to quash the impugned order in PAN:AABFG3045J, dated 30.03.2022 in DIN: ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/ 1042064473(1) passed by the first respondent under Section 147 r.w.s.144 & 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for brevity) for the assessment year 2017-18.

2. The primary contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner's partnership firm was assessed with tax for the assessment year 2017-18 and the order was passed by the first respondent in PAN:AABFG3045 dated 30.03.2022 arriving at the assessable income at Rs.4,79,66,987/-. Thereafter, a notice under Section 148 of the Act, was said to have been issued to the petitioner to the secondary mail id and the petitioner has not received any such mail. Further, another notice, dated 11.11.2021 under Section 142(1) of the Act, was said to have been sent to the secondary mail, shell.madurai@gmail.com, which was also not received by the petitioner. Again a notice, dated 31.01.2022 was said to have been served to an email id, abc@gamil.com and the same was also not received by the petitioner. On 23.03.2022, a show cause notice was issued on the petitioner. Finally, a physical notice, dated 31.01.2022 was said to have been served on the petitioner. Thereafter, due to the arbitration dispute, the petitioner was not able to file all the documents before the first respondent. Hence, the account details could not be submitted. In the meanwhile, the petitioner has sent reply on 25.03.2022 seeking four weeks time to submit the necessary documents. Thereafter, without considering the request of the petitioner, the first respondent completed the assessment and passed the assessment order and final notice was sent, just seven days prior to passing of the assessment order.

3. According to the petitioner, notices were not served on the petitioner, though the department claims that it has been uploaded in the portal and that is sufficient. The petitioner had furnished his mobile number and the mail of the petitioner, namely shell.madurai@yahoo.co.in. The show cause notice and the final notice were issued at the belated stage. Earlier, notices under Sections 147, 148 of the Act were not issued to the petitioner. If the petitioner has put on notice, earlier he has filed the returns to the Department. Hence, the fundamental requirements ie., issuance of notice has not been done in the petitioner's case and without providing sufficient time, a show cause notice was served on 23.03.2022 and an assessment order was also passed. According to the petitioner, the first notice was issued on 30.03.2021 and as per Section 153 of the Act, the assessment has to be completed within one year.

4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that as per Sections 282 and 127(b) of the Act, the procedure has been stipulated for communication of the notice sent by the department to the assessee. The petitioner had given his address and email id particulars. The notice has been sent by the officer of the department. The petitioner, having received notice can be quite and not participated in the proceedings. Finally, the petitioner had sent a communication seeking four weeks time for filing returns, which is not permissible. Since the first notice under Section 148 of Act was issued on 30.03.2021, as per Section 153 of the Act, the assessment has to be completed within one year, ie., on or before 30.03.2022. Apart from that, the petitioner was served with the notice under Section 14