ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI)

1. Heard Mr. Darshan Patel, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Maithili Mehta for the respondents.

2. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned Senior Standing Counsel, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents.

3. Having regard to the controversy involved in this petition, with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing and final disposal today. The present petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the Assessment Order dated 27.02.2026 passed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), read with Section 144B of the Act.

4. The brief facts giving rise to filing of the present writ petition are as under:

4.1. The petitioner is an individual assessee, who filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 on 30.10.2018. The petitioner also filed revised return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-19 on 31.10.2018. Subsequently to the filing of return of income, the petitioner received a show cause notice for proposed variation on 07.02.2026. The petitioner was given time till 13.02.2026 to give proper reply to the show-cause notice.

4.2. In response to the show cause notice, the petitioner made a request on 10.02.2026 for an adjournment. Subsequent thereto, the matter was adjourned till 17.02.2026. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner received notice under Section 142(1) of the Act on 11.02.2026, which inter alia informed that hearing is scheduled on 17.02.2026. It is the case of the petitioner that reply to the show cause notice was filed on 16.02.2026 and along with the reply a categorical request was also made that hearing through virtual mode be granted. It is the case of the petitioner that despite the request, without considering the same and without granting any opportunity of hearing through video conferencing, the respondents passed an Assessment Order under Section 147 of the Act read with Section 144B of the Act raising demand of Rs.18,53,54,590/- which is now impugned in the present writ petition.

5. Mr.Darshan Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the respondents has passed the final Assessment Order under Section 147 of the Act read with Section 144B of the Act in gross violation of the principles of natural justice without providing an opportunity of video conferencing as per Section 144B(6)(vii) of the Act and Section 144B(6)(viii) of the Act. Learned advocate Mr. Darshan Patel has further submitted that though the petitioner had made a specific request for hearing through video conferencing and the same is also reflected on portal, however without granting opportunity of hearing through video conferencing, the final Assessment Order under Section 147 of the Act read with Section 144B of the Act was passed raising a demand of Rs.18,53,54,590/-.

5.1 It was further submitted by learned advocate Mr.Darshan Patel that the final Assessment Order is passed with a predetermined approach which is detrimental to the petitioner as it is without granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

5.2. It was further pointed out by learned advocate Mr. Darshan Patel that Section 144B(6)(vii) of the Act specifically states that in a case where a variation is proposed in the income or loss or in the draft assessment order, an opportunity has to be provided to the assessee by serving notice and calling upon him to show-cause as to why the assessment should not be completed as per such income or loss as determined. In such cases, the assessee may request for personal hearing.

5.3. Further, in the instant case, the notice is issued on 07.02.2026, wherein, the petitioner has requested for hearing till 25.02.2026. Thereafter another notice under Section 14