USHA GUPTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-36(1) DELHI & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)-11410/2023HC Delhi2023:DHC:644429 August 20233 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Delhi, without making any observations on the merits of the matter, inclined to set aside the assessment order dated May 18, 2023, as the best way forward. The Court ordered accordingly. Liberty was granted to the Assessing Officer (AO) to pass a fresh assessment order after giving an opportunity to the petitioner. The petitioner stated she would file a response within three weeks, and the AO was directed to ensure the portal is opened for her to upload the reply. The petitioner was also given liberty to transmit a copy of the reply via email to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The AO was further directed to issue a notice for a personal hearing, indicating the date and time, and thereafter pass a speaking order. The writ petition was disposed of in these terms.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Usha Gupta, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated May 18, 2023, passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-36(1), Delhi, for Assessment Year 2013-14. The challenge was confined to the alleged violation of principles of natural justice. The assessee received a show cause notice on May 8, 2023, proposing a variation in taxable income and was given time to respond by May 10, 2023. The assessee requested an adjournment on May 9, 2023, until May 18, 2023, to gather material. The assessee claims that on May 18, 2023, when attempting to upload the response, the portal was closed. These facts were not disputed by the revenue.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order dated May 18, 2023, passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is liable to be set aside on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the principles of natural justice were violated because the request for adjournment was not dealt with, and the portal for uploading the response was closed when the assessee attempted to do so on May 18, 2023, after seeking an adjournment until that date. The assessee relied on the fact that the show cause notice was served on May 8, 2023, and the response was due by May 10, 2023, with a request for adjournment made on May 9, 2023. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not file a counter-affidavit and conceded to the proposed order, indicating no specific argument against the assessee's claim regarding the procedural irregularity.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI %

Date of Decision: 29.08.2023 + W.P.(C) 11410/2023

USHA GUPTA

..... Petitioner

Through: Mr Nitin Gulati with Mr Amol Sinha,

Advs.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-36(1) DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents

Through: Mr Sanjay Kumar, Sr. 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): CM Appl. 44399/2023 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions W.P.(C) 11410/2023 & CM Appl. 44400/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief]. 2. Issue notice. 2.1 Mr Sanjay Kumar, learned senior standing counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/revenue. 3. Given the order that we propose to pass, Mr Kumar says that he does not wish to file a counter-affidavit in the matter and he will argue the matter, based on the record presently available with the court. Therefore, with the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the writ petition is W.P.(C) 11410/2023

Page 1 of 3 Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:06.09.2023 14:04:40 Signature Not Verified

taken up for hearing and final disposal at this stage itself. 4. This writ petition concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. 5. The petitioner seeks to assail the assessment order, dated 18.05.2023, passed under Section 147 read with 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, “The Act”]. 6. Mr Nitin Gulati, learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, confines his challenge, at this juncture, only to the infraction of principles of natural justice. 7. It is pointed out that the show cause notice dated 08.05.2023 (SCN), was served on the petitioner proposing a variation of taxable income. 8. Via the SCN, the petitioner was granted time to file a response by 10.05.2023 (15:46 hours). 9. The petitioner made a request on the very next date i.e., 09.05.2023, for adjournment. The petitioner sought adjournment till 18.05.2023. The reason given by the petitioner for seeking adjournment was that she had to gather material to respond to the SCN. 10. It is the petitioner’s case that the request was not dealt with and on 18.05.2023 when she attempted to upload her response, she could not do so as the designated portal had been closed. 11. These facts are not in dispute. 12. The assessment order, as indicated above, was passed on 18.05.2023. 13. Without making any observations on the merits of the matter, we are inclined to set aside the assessment order, as this would be the best way forward. 13.1 It is ordered accordingly. W.P.(C) 11410/2023

Page 2 of 3 Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:06.09.2023 14:04:40 Signature Not Verified

14.

Liberty is, however, granted to the Assessing Officer (AO) to pass a fresh assessment order after giving an opportunity to the petitioner. 15. Mr Gulati says that the petitioner will file a response within the next three (3) weeks. 16. The AO will ensure that the portal is opened for the petitioner to upload its reply. 17. Furthermore, the petitioner is also given liberty to transmit a copy of the reply to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) via email. 18. The AO will, thereafter, issue a notice to the petitioner for personal hearing. The notice will indicate the date and time when the hearing will take place. 18.1 Needless to add, the AO will, thereafter, pass a speaking order. 19. The writ petition is disposed of, in the aforesaid terms. 20. Consequently, the pending interlocutory applications shall stand closed. 21. Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.

RAJIV SHAKDHER

JUDGE

GIRISH KATHPALIA

JUDGE AUGUST 29, 2023/RY

Click here to check corrigendum, if any W.P.(C) 11410/2023

Page 3 of 3 Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI CHAUHAN Signing Date:06.09.2023 14:04:40 Signature Not Verified

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →