HOTEL AKSHAYA, vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/15298/2022HC KeralaKLHC01030712202217 January 2024Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH4 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the assessment order dated March 29, 2022, was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court found that the petitioner's request for a video conference hearing on March 23, 2022, was evident from the screenshot of the Income Tax Department's website (Ext.P12) and could not be disputed. Since no opportunity of being heard was provided despite the request, the impugned order was set aside. The matter was remitted back to the second respondent to provide the petitioner an opportunity of hearing through video conferencing and then pass a fresh assessment order in accordance with the law. The Court did not leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Hotel Akshaya, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated March 29, 2022, for the assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner contended that they had requested an opportunity to be heard via video conferencing on March 23, 2022, through the Income Tax Department's website. However, the assessment order was passed without providing this opportunity. The petitioner argued that this violated the principles of natural justice. The assessment order was passed by the second respondent, the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order dated March 29, 2022, passed for assessment year 2017-18, is liable to be set aside for violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the denial of an opportunity of being heard through video conferencing as requested by the petitioner. Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that they had specifically requested an opportunity to be heard via video conferencing on March 23, 2022, and the Income Tax Department's website showed this request. The subsequent passing of the assessment order without granting this opportunity constituted a violation of the principles of natural justice. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 27TH POUSHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 15298 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: HOTEL AKSHAYA, GURUVAYUR ROAD, POONKUNNAM, THRISSUR-680002, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, VIKAS T.B. BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, S.T.NAGAR, THRISSUR-680001. 2 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI-100001. BY ADVS. P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.) JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, KERALA OTHER PRESENT: JOSE JOSEPH-SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT Dated this the 17th day of January, 2024 The present writ petition has been filed impugning Ext.P13 assessment order dated 29.03.2022 in respect of the assessment year 2017-18. The only ground on which the assessment order has been assailed is that the petitioner requested an opportunity of being heard through the facility of video conferencing on 23.03.2022 in Ext.P12. However, without affording an opportunity of being heard, the assessment order has been passed. The evidence of request for providing facility of video conferencing cannot be disputed as Ext.P12 is the screenshot of the request of the petitioner and response on the website of the Income Tax Department. Thus, there has been no opportunity of being heard provided to the petitioner despite request for seeking opportunity, and the impugned order has been passed in violation of principle of natural justice and therefore, the same is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the 2nd respondent to provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner through video conferencing and after hearing the petitioner, pass a fresh assessment order, in accordance with the law. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition stands finally disposed of. DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE AP

Appendix — schedule of exhibits

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15298/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 COPY OF PARTNERSHIP DEED REGISTERED BETWEEN THE PARTNER AND THE MANAGING PARTNER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 5.2.2018. Exhibit P2 COPY OF PAN CARD OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT DATED 5.2.2018. Exhibit P3 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 24.3.2021. Exhibit P4 COPY OF REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 8.4.2021. Exhibit P5 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 2.12.2021. Exhibit P6 COPY OF REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 8.12.2021. Exhibit P7 COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 21.12.2021. Exhibit P8 COPY OF REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27.12.2021. Exhibit P9 COPY OF DRAFT ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 20.3.2022. Exhibit P10 COPY OF REPLY FILED BY THE EPTITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23.3.2022. Exhibit P11 COPY OF REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 29.3.2022. Exhibit P12 COPY OF WEB PORTAL OF INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT DATED NIL. Exhibit P13 COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 29.3.2022. Exhibit P14 COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO.2745 (E) ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DELHI DATED 13.8.2020.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →