Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Rangasamy Boopathi vs The Income Tax Officer on 3 October, 2024

Author: Krishnan Ramasamy

Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy

                                                                                    W.P.No.22011 of 2023



                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                               DATED: 03.10.2024
                                                    CORAM:

                           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

                                             WP.No.22011 of 2023
                                   and W.M.P.Nos.21375 and 21377 of 2024
                    Rangasamy Boopathi                             ....  Petitioner
                                                         Vs.
                    1.The Income Tax Officer,
                    Non Corp Ward-4 (1),
                    63, Race Course Road,
                    Coimbatore – 641 018.

                    2.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1,
                    63, Race Course Road,
                    Coimbatore- 641 018.
                    3.The Income Tax Officer,
                    Assessment Unit,
                    National Faceless Assessment Centre,
                    Income Tax Department,
                    Ministry of Finance,
                    Room No.401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp,
                    Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,
                    Delhi-110 003.                          ...                  Respondents
                    Prayer:- Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of
                    India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records in
                    DIN:ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-24/1053308023(1) dated 30.05.2023 on the
                    file of the 3rd respondent relating to the A.Y.2013-14 and quash the same.


                                     For Petitioner  : Mr.L.Dinesh
                                     For Respondents : Dr.B.Ramasamy
                                                       Senior Standing Counsel


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                      ORDER

                    1/6
                                                                                      W.P.No.22011 of 2023




                            The present Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of

                    Certiorari, to call for the records in DIN:ITBA/AST/S/147/2023-

                    24/1053308023(1) dated 30.05.2023 on the file of the 3rd respondent

                    relating to the A.Y.2013-14 and quash the same.

                            2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a notice

                    was issued by the 3rd respondent on 17.05.2023 calling upon the petitioner

                    to file reply on or before 22.05.2023. The petitioner filed reply to the said

                    notice on 22.05.2023 and requested to fix personal hearing on 06.06.2023

                    to substantiate his case. The 3rd respondent then issued a scheduling notice

                    dated 29.05.2023 signed at 01.12 pm fixing the VC on 29.05.2023 itself at

                    04.00 p.m.        Since the time provided by the respondent for personal

                    hearing was meager, the petitioner was not able to attend the personal

                    hearing through video conferencing. Hence, the 3rd respondent passed the

                    impugned order of assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on

                    30.05.2023. Without affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the

                    petitioner, the assessment order came to be passed on 30.05.2023. If the

                    3rd respondent is intended to take any action and pass the assessment order

                    against the petitioner, it is mandatory to issue notice for personal hearing.



                    Therefore, he submitted that the impugned order is in violation of principal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis


                    2/6
                                                                                        W.P.No.22011 of 2023



                    of natural justice. Hence, he prayed for setting aside the impugned order.

                                  3. Learned Senior Standing counsel appearing for the respondent

                    would submit that the department after providing an opportunity of

                    personal hearing, issued notice dated 17.05.2023 and called the petitioner

                    for personal hearing. Upon considering the reply of the petitioner dated

                    22.05.2023, the 3rd respondent issued a notice dated 29.05.2023 for

                    personal hearing. Therefore, there is no merit in the submission of the

                    petitioner. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

                            4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior

                    Standing counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the materials

                    placed before this Court.

                            5. The main issue that arises for consideration in the present case is as

                    to whether the opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the

                    petitioner before the passing of assessment order. Initially, notice was

                    issued on 17.05.2023 calling upon the petitioner to file reply on or before

                    22.05.2023 and the petitioner filed his reply on 22.05.2023 requesting to fix

                    personal hearing on 06.06.2023. Pursuant to which, the 3rd respondent

                    uploaded the notice dated 29.05.2023 at 01.12 p.m by providing short

                    duration of 02.40 hours and fixed the personal hearing at 04.00 p.m. Due

                    to the short duration, the petitioner was unaware of the notice and he was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis


                    3/6
                                                                                          W.P.No.22011 of 2023



                    not able to appear for personal hearing.           Hence, the reasons provided by

                    the petitioner for being unaware of the notice, which was uploaded in the

                    web portal, are appears to be genuine.

                            6. In the case on hand, the impugned assessment order was passed

                    against the petitioner without providing an opportunity of personal hearing.

                    Thus, it is clear that the impugned order was passed in violation of

                    principles of natural justice and hence, the same is liable to be set aside.

                            7. In view of the above, this Court passes the following order:

                                      i) The impugned order dated 30.05.2023 is set aside
                                    and    remanded        back   to   the   respondent   for
                                    fresh consideration.
                                      ii) If the petitioner is intend to file any additional
                                    reply, the same shall be filed within a period of 2 weeks
                                    from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
                                      iii) On filing of such additional reply by the
                                    petitioner, the respondent shall consider the same and
                                    issue a 14 days clear notice, by fixing the date of
                                    personal hearing, to the petitioner and thereafter, pass
                                    appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with
                                    law, after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as
                                    possible.




                                  8. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is allowed. There
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis


                    4/6
                                                                                W.P.No.22011 of 2023



                    shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous

                    Petitions are closed.


                                                                                  03.10.2024
                    Index:Yes/No
                    Web:Yes/No
                    Speaking/Non Speaking
                    msv




                    To

                    1.The Income Tax Officer,
                    Non Corp Ward-4 (1),
                    63, Race Course Road,
                    Coimbatore – 641 018.

                    2.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1,
                    63, Race Course Road,
                    Coimbatore- 641 018.

                    3.The Income Tax Officer,
                    Assessment Unit,
                    National Faceless Assessment Centre,
                    Income Tax Department,
                    Ministry of Finance,
                    Room No.401, 2nd Floor, E-Ramp,
                    Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,
                    Delhi-110 003.


                                                              KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

msv https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6 W.P.No.22011 of 2023 WP.No.22011 of 2023 and W.M.P.Nos.21375 and 21377 of 2023 03.10.2024 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6