M/S SHARDA LOGISTICS vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISSTA NT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WPT/191/2021HC ChhattisgarhCGHC01024402202123 April 2026Author: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessment order dated March 25, 2021, was passed at 19:38 hours, while the petitioner was granted time to file a reply until 23:59 hours on the same day. This meant the petitioner's right to file a reply was curtailed before the expiry of the granted time. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the impugned order was passed in utter violation of the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal quashed the impugned assessment order dated March 25, 2021, and directed the concerned authority to pass a fresh order after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The ratio decidendi is that an assessment order passed before the expiry of the time granted for reply to a show cause notice violates natural justice.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s Sharda Logistics, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated March 25, 2021, and a notice of demand and penalty under Sections 270A and 271AAC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2018-19. The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed on March 25, 2021, at 19:38 hours, despite the show cause notice issued on March 22, 2021, granting time to file a reply until March 25, 2021, at 23:59 hours. This, the petitioner contended, violated principles of natural justice as insufficient time was provided. The respondents argued that sufficient time was granted and the petitioner failed to file a reply, justifying the assessment order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order dated March 25, 2021, passed by the respondent authority for Assessment Year 2018-19, is liable to be quashed for violating the principles of natural justice, specifically concerning the time granted for filing a reply to the show cause notice (turning on Section 270A and Section 271AAC of the Income Tax Act, 1961)? Assessee's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed before the expiry of the time granted for filing a reply to the show cause notice, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and warranting quashing of the order. The petitioner relied on the principle that adequate opportunity for hearing must be provided. Revenue's Contentions: The respondents contended that sufficient time was granted until March 25, 2021, 23:59 hours, and the petitioner failed to file a reply, justifying the assessment order passed by the authority. The respondents argued that the petition is misconceived.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 271AAC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1

2026:CGHC:18905

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 191 of 2021 M/s Sharda Logistics A Partnership Firm Having Its Registered Office At 238, Ahuja Towers, Aushadi Vatika, Dumartarai, Dhamtari Road, Raipur , Chhattisgarh 492001, Through Its Partner Mr. Sunil Ahuja., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner versus 1 - Additional/joint/deputy/assissta Nt Commissioner Of Income Tax National E Assessment Centre, Mayur Bhawan, Connaught Lane, Barakhamba, New Delhi Delhi 110001. 2 - Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1) Raipur , Central Revenue Building, Raipur , Chhattisgarh 492001. 3 - Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue , Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi 11001

... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya Agrawal, on behalf of Mr. Rajat Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSG with Mr. Abhishek Banjare, CGC.

2

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 24/04/2026

1.

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief:- “10. 1. Issue writ, order or direction of certiorari mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside the impugned Assessment Order dated 25.03.2021 passed by the Respondent and the Notice of demand and penalty under Section 270A and 271AAC of Income Tax Act, 1961 for recovery of demand for A.Y. 2018-19 from the Petitioner;

10.2.

Issue and appropriate writ, order or direction of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent Authority to carry out the Assessment afresh affording an opportunity of proper hearing to the Petitioner; and

10.3.

Pass any other order(s) or direction(s) as are deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent No.1 issued a show cause notice dated 22.03.2021 with respect to the Assessment Year 2018-19 and granted time to file reply up to 25.03.2021, 23.59 hours. However, the assessment order was passed on 25.03.2021 at 19:38 hours, i.e. before expiry of the time granted by the authority i.e. 23.59 hours of 25.03.2021. He would contend that the petitioner was not provided sufficient time to file reply. He would further contend that since the assessment order has been passed before expiry of the time granted, there is violation of the principles of natural justice and the same deserves to be quashed.

3.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would oppose the submission made by counsel for the petitioner and 3 submit that the show cause notice was issued on 22.03.2021 and sufficient time till 25.03.2021, 23:59 hours, was granted, but the petitioner failed to file reply; therefore, the authority concerned rightly passed the order of assessment; thus, the petition is misconceived and deserves to be dismissed.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents.

5.

The petitioner was granted time up to 25.03.2021 till 23:59 hours, whereas the assessment order was passed on 25.03.2021 at 19:38 hours, therefore, the right of the petitioner to file reply was curtailed by the authority before expiry of the time granted. Hence, the order impugned has been passed in utter violation of the principles of natural justice.

6.

Taking into consideration the facts discussed above, the order dated impugned dated 25.03.2021 (Annexure P-1) is hereby quashed. The concerned authority is directed to pass a fresh order after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

7.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Interim order granted earlier is hereby vacated.

Rakesh Mohan Pandey

JUDGE Nadim

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →