Delhi High Court - Orders
Gpl-Rktcpl Jv vs National Faceless Assessment Centre ... on 3 June, 2021
Author: Rajiv Shakdher
Bench: Rajiv Shakdher, Talwant Singh
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 5546/2021 & CM APPL. 17180/2021
GPL-RKTCPL JV .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate and
Mr. Aditya Vohra, Advocate.
versus
NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI
(EARLIER NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI)
.....Respondent
Through: Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
ORDER
% 03.06.2021 [Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]
1. Today, Mr. Abhishek Maratha, learned counsel, has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent/revenue. Mr. Maratha says that notwithstanding the narrow timeframe granted to the petitioner for filing a reply/objection to the show cause notice-cum-draft assessment order dated 22.04.2021, he would want to place on record a counter-affidavit.
2. To be noted, the show cause notice-cum-draft assessment order dated 22.04.2021 called upon the petitioner to file a reply/objection by 23:59 hours on 23.04.2021.
3. On 27.05.2021, when notice was issued in the matter, we had recorded the following assertions made on behalf of the petitioner in paragraph 3.3. For the sake of convenience, the same is extracted hereafter:
3.3. The petitioner avers that, it learnt about the aforesaid show cause notice-
cum-draft assessment order, via its counsel, only after the impugned assessment order, had been already passed, i.e., on 25.04.2021, as the father of the W.P.(C) 5546/2021 1/3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARIOM Signing Date:10.06.2021 12:51:01 petitioner's counsel was admitted in hospital due to coronavirus and therefore, he could not access his e-mail. It is also the petitioner's case that, due to lockdown imposed in the State of Chhattisgarh on account of coronavirus, it was not possible to collate documents, and file the reply/objections to the show cause notice cum draft assessment order. It is in these circumstances, according to the petitioner, a request for adjournment was filed with the respondent."
4. It is submitted by Mr. Ajay Vohra, learned senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, that given the aforesaid facts, the timeframe granted by the Assessing Officer (in short "AO") for filing objections was extremely constricted, and therefore, that by itself breaches the principles of natural justice. Mr. Vohra says that the opportunity has to be adequate and more so, in the present times, when people are afflicted with Coronavirus and, are not able to go about their normal business.
5. Mr. Maratha, however, contends to the contrary. 5.1 At this stage, we tend to agree with Mr. Vohra, that the timeframe granted to the petitioner was extremely narrow. The reasons given by the petitioner, which are supported by an affidavit, appear viable to us at this point in time. The matter will be examined once the counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondent/revenue.
6. Accordingly, list the matter on 21.09.2021.
W.P.(C) 5546/2021 2/3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARIOM Signing Date:10.06.2021 12:51:017. In the meanwhile, there shall be a stay on the operation of the assessment order issued under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"), for the Assessment Year 2018- 2019, dated 24.04.2021 and accompanying notice for demand issued under Section 156 of the Act, as well as notice for initiating penalty proceedings issued under Section 271AAC(1) of the Act.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J TALWANT SINGH, J JUNE 3, 2021/pa Click here to check corrigendum, if any W.P.(C) 5546/2021 3/3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARIOM Signing Date:10.06.2021 12:51:01