N.22Sl WPA 8698 of 2025

151/CL

10.02.26 Creative Poly Packs Pvt. Ltd.

Sl-08 v.

Ct.551 Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department & Ors.

(S.R.)

Mr. Ramesh Kumar Patodia Mr. Megha Agarwal … for the petitioner. Mr. Prithu Dudharia … for the respondents.

1. This writ petition has been filed assailing an assessment order dated March 20, 2025 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of assessment year

2023-24.

2. It is the petitioner’s case that on March 04, 2025, a notice calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why should the proposed variation not be made, was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner could not file its reply to the said notice to show cause within the time specified in the notice and accordingly sought for an adjournment.

3. Such adjournment was granted by a notice dated March 8, 2025 thereby fixing March 12, 2025 as the date for filing reply to the said notice to show cause.

4. On March 12, 2025, the petitioner filed its reply to the notice to show cause thereby, inter alia, requesting for an opportunity for personal hearing. Despite such request being made, the Assessing Officer proceeded to pass the final order of assessment without hearing the petitioner. The petitioner is before this Court by way of present writ petition assailing the assessment order dated March

20, 2025.

5. Mr. Patodia, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner should not be relegated to the statutory appellate forum inasmuch as the petitioner has not been heard despite a request being made by the petitioner for personal hearing specifically in writing. It is submitted that the order impugned should be interfered with by this Court for the same having been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, and that the petitioner should be afforded an opportunity to present its case before the Assessing Officer so that appropriate order can be passed.

6. Mr. Dudharia, learned advocate appearing for the respondent Revenue Authorities submits that the notice to show cause issued initially was followed by another notice on March 12, 2025 which indicated that if the petitioner wished to avail the opportunity of personal hearing, it was required to click “the seek video conferencing button” available against the show-cause notice i.e. “SCN”. It is submitted that since the petitioner did not follow that mode specified therefore opportunity of personal hearing could not be given.

7. Mr. Patodia, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted in response that such contention of the Revenue has not been accepted by various Hon’ble High Courts across the country. In support of his submission he relies on the following judgments: -

(1)Global Vectra Helicorp Ltd. v. Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (W.P. (C) 5912/2024) decided on April 26, 2024 by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court.

(2)M/s. Williams Lea India Private Limited represented by the authorized signatory, blesson John Kaduvinal vs. Additional/ Joint/ Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/ Income Tax Officer, National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi (W.P. 12760 of 2021) decided on 28.06.2022 by the Hon’ble Madras High Court (3)Satish Kumar Bansal Hug v. National Faceles Assessment Centre Nafac & Anr. (Writ Tax No. 627 of 2024) decided on April 26, 2024 decided by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court.

It is submitted that in view of the plethora of pronouncements by the various Hon’ble Courts, the stand of the Revenue Authorities that hearing could not be given to the petitioner since the petitioner did not avail the opportunity in the mode indicated in the notice to show cause should not be countenanced.

8. Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the material on record.

9. It is now well settled that if an assessee specifically asks for an opportunity of personal hearing at the time of assessment, the Assessing Officer must afford such opportunity to the ass