Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Orissa High Court

Sribasta Kumar Swain vs Union Of India And Another .... Opposite ... on 1 October, 2021

Author: B. P. Routray

Bench: B. P. Routray

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                    W.P. (C) No.29279 of 2021


             Sribasta Kumar Swain                   ....             Petitioner
                                                     Mr. R. P. Kar, Advocate
                                      -versus-
             Union of India and another         ....       Opposite Parties
                                                 Mr. P.K.Parhi, ASGI and
                 Mr. T.K.Satapathy, Sr. Standing Counsel for Opp. Party 3



                        CORAM:
                        THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                        JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY


                                             ORDER

Order No. 01.10.2021

01. 1. The challenge in this writ petition is to an assessment order dated 8th September, 2021 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (NFAC) under Section 143 (3) read with Section 144B of the Income tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18.

2. Notice. Mr. P.K.Parhi, learned ASGI accepts notice for Opposite Party No.1 and 2 and Mr. T.K.Satapathy, Sr. Standing Counsel accepts notice for Opposite Party No. 3 Department.

3. Mr. Kar, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submits that the principal ground on which the impugned assessment order has been challenged is that the mandatory requirement under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), has not been complied with prior to issuing the impugned assessment order.

Under Section 144 B of the Act, a draft assessment order as well as a show-cause notice should have been communicated to the Petitioner prior to passing of the impugned assessment order. In the present case, that mandatory requirement has not been complied with.

4. Mr. Kar relies on the judgments of the Delhi High Court dated 27th May, 2021 passed in W.P. (C) No.5552 of 2021 (YCD Industries v. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi) and W.P. (C) No.5491 of 2021 (M/s. Lokesh Constructions P. Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax) and the judgment of this Court dated 8th July, 2021 passed in W.P.(C) No.19402 of 2021 (Orissa Stevedores Ltd. v. Union of India and others).

5. It is obvious that in the present case the impugned assessment order was passed without communicating to the Petitioner any draft order of assessment under Section 144B of the IT Act.

6. In view of the clear legal position explained in the above judgments, on the above short ground this Court sets aside the impugned order of assessment dated 8th September, 2021 of the NFAC as well as all consequential notices/orders. The Court nevertheless grants liberty to the Department to pass a fresh assessment order for the AY 2017-18 after complying with the requirement of the law by giving the Petitioner a personal hearing at a date and time, which should be communicated to the Petitioner sufficiently in advance. It is needless to say that the Petitioner assessee will cooperate in the fresh assessment proceedings and furnish all the documents and information as are available with it relevant to the proceedings.

7. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.

( Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice (B.P. Routray) Judge M. Panda Page 3 of 3