Susheel Kumar v. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 05 Oct 2023 · 2023:DHC:7816-DB

Rajiv Shakdher; Girish Kathpalia

W.P.(C) 8267/2021

2023:DHC:7816-DB

tax appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court set aside an income tax assessment order for failure to grant a personal hearing and directed a fresh order in compliance with natural justice.

Full Text

W.P.(C) 8267/2021
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 05.10.2023

W.P.(C) 8267/2021
SUSHEEL KUMAR ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms Kavita Jha with Mr Himanshu Aggarwal, Advs.

VERSUS

NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Abhishek Maratha, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr Parth Semwal, Jr.
Standing Counsel.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL)

JUDGMENT

1. On 10.03.2022, when the matter was heard by the coordinate bench comprising myself [Rajiv Shakdher, J.] and Hon’ble Mr Justice Jasmeet Singh, the principal grievance articulated by the petitioner was recorded.

2. For convenience, the relevant parts of the order dated 10.03.2022 are extracted hereafter:

“1. This writ petition is directed against the assessment order dated 21.04.2021, passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). The impugned assessment order concerns the assessment year (AY) 2018-2019. 1.1. Besides this, challenge has also been laid to the notice of demand dated 21.04.2021, issued under Section 156 of the Act, and notice for initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 274 read with Section 270A of the Act, of even date.

2. A perusal of the impugned assessment order dated 21.04.2021 discloses that a hearing was granted to the petitioner/assessee on 16.04.2021, albeit, via video-conferencing mechanism.

2.1. However, Ms Kavita Jha, who appears on behalf of the petitioner/assessee, on instructions, says that no personal hearing was granted.

3. Mr Shailender Singh, who appears on behalf of the respondents/revenue, says that he will revert [sic...return] with instructions as to whether the proceedings held by the Assessing Officer on 16.04.2021 were recorded. In case, the proceedings were recorded, Mr Singh will place either a transcript of the same or the record of the proceedings in digital mode before us, on the next date of hearing. 3.[1] A copy of the transcript/digital recording will be provided to the counsel for the petitioner/assessee as well.” [Emphasis is ours]

3. The matter presently stands assigned to Mr Abhishek Maratha, learned senior standing counsel. Mr Maratha has returned with instructions on the specific query raised on 10.03.2022 i.e., to provide the Court with the the record of proceedings said to have been held by the Assessing Officer (AO) on 16.04.2021, either by way of a transcript or digital mode.

4. Mr Maratha has returned with instructions that seem to suggest that at the relevant point in time, the respondents/revenue were working with the help of “demo servers” provided by the National Informatics Centre (NIC).

5. It is stated that after respondents/revenue deployed its servers, it lost access to the information stored on the demo servers, and therefore, the record of the hearing held by the AO cannot be recovered.

6. The petitioner, as noted on 10.03.2022, has asserted on affidavit that no personal hearing was granted.

7. In the absence of relevant material, this assertion would have to be accepted.

8. In these circumstances, in our view, the best way forward would be to set aside the impugned assessment order with liberty to the AO to pass a fresh order after adhering to the principles of natural justice.

9. It is ordered accordingly.

10. Consequently, the assessment order dated 21.04.2021 is set aside.

11. The AO will take the next steps in the matter as per law.

3,220 characters total

12. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

(RAJIV SHAKDHER) JUDGE (GIRISH KATHPALIA)

JUDGE OCTOBER 5, 2023 Click here to check corrigendum, if any

Susheel Kumar v. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi & Anr.

AI Summary

Full Text

JUDGMENT

Contact Us for a Free Consultation