A.S.SHAJAHAN, vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/13473/2022HC KeralaKLHC01027028202212 January 2024Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that there appeared to be a violation of the principles of natural justice because the petitioner was not provided with a fresh link and password to make online submissions before the impugned order was passed. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, and the impugned order dated March 25, 2022, was set aside. The matter was remitted back to the respondent with a direction to provide a fresh link to the petitioner for making online submissions in respect of the penalty proceedings. The court stipulated that if the petitioner failed to join and make submissions after being provided with the fresh link and password, no further opportunity would be granted. The judgment did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, A.S. Shajahan, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated March 25, 2022, passed under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This order levied a penalty of Rs. 83,44,607/-, which is 2% of Rs. 41,72,30,364/-, for the assessment year 2016-17. The petitioner received a notice of hearing on March 16, 2022, for an online submission on March 17, 2022. The petitioner requested an adjournment via email on March 17, 2022, citing the death anniversary rituals of his father. The petitioner claims the adjournment request was received and opened on the portal, but no fresh link was provided, and the impugned order was passed ex-parte.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the penalty order passed under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is liable to be set aside on the grounds of violation of principles of natural justice, specifically for not providing a fresh link for online submissions after an adjournment request was made? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Section 270A). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that he was not provided with a fresh link for online submissions after his adjournment request on March 17, 2022, due to his father's death anniversary rituals. Consequently, the impugned order was passed ex-parte, violating the principles of natural justice. Revenue's Contention: The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department could not confirm that a fresh notice of hearing or a fresh link was issued to the petitioner for making submissions in the penalty proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 271A

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 FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 22ND POUSHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 13473 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: A.S.SHAJAHAN, AGED 58 YEARS 32/3071F, FABA AGENCIES, NH BYE PASS, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM-682 019. BY ADVS. ANIL D. NAIR TELMA RAJU EDATHARA VINEETA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT/S: ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI-110 001. OTHER PRESENT: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM-SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT Dated this the 12th day of January, 2024 The present writ petition has been filed impugning Ext.P9 order dated 25.03.2022 passed under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 whereby penalty under Section 271A of the Income Tax Act has been levied amounting to Rs.83,44,607/-. It is being 2% of Rs.41,72,30,364/- in respect of the assessment year 2016-

17.2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was issued notice of hearing on 16.03.2022 in Ext.P7 providing the link for making submissions online on 17.03.2022. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner requested for an adjournment vide email dated 17.03.2022 itself. The said request for adjournment was made on the ground that the authorized representative of the petitioner had to attend the ritual of his father’s death anniversary on 17.03.2022 and therefore, it was not possible for him to attend the hearing on 17.03.2022. The request was received and the status on the portal would suggest that the request was opened. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no fresh link was provided for hearing and the impugned order came to be passed exparte.

3.

Sri.Christopher Abraham, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department is not in a position to suggest that fresh notice of hearing was issued to the petitioner or fresh link was provided for joining online for making submissions in respect of the penalty proceedings which got finalised on 25.03.2022. Considering the fact that there appears to be violation of principle of natural justice as the petitioner was not provided with fresh link and password etc, for making submissions online before passing the impugned order on Ext.P9 dated 25.03.2022, the present writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the respondent with direction to provide fresh link to the petitioner for making online submissions in respect of the penalty proceedings. If the petitioner fails to join and make submissions after he is provided with the fresh link and password no further opportunity shall be granted. Let this order be communicated to the respondent as a request of learned Standing Counsel for compliance. DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE AP

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13473/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 25.03.2019. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 14.01.2020. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20.02.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 27.08.2021. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03.09.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROOF OF HAVING ELECTRONICALLY FILED THE REPLY. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.03.2022. Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION FILED ALONG WITH EMAIL CONFIRMATION DATED 17.03.2022. Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 25.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.

More judgments on Section 270A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →