ALLIANCE HOMES vs. THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/22904/2021HC KeralaKLHC01058328202125 August 2022Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the order of assessment (Ext.P11) passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre was liable to be quashed. The Court reasoned that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of hearing through video conferencing, despite their specific request. The fact that communications from the Department bounced back did not absolve the authority of its duty to ensure proper service and provide a hearing. Consequently, the Court quashed the assessment order and directed the National Faceless Assessment Centre to complete the assessment afresh. This fresh assessment must include affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing through video conferencing. The petitioner will also be permitted to upload all necessary documents. The Court provided specific email IDs for communication regarding the video conference and mandated that the fresh assessment be completed within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s. Alliance Homes, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order of assessment (Ext.P11) passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre. The petitioner's primary contention was that the assessment order was issued without providing an opportunity for a hearing through video conferencing, despite a specific request. The respondent Income Tax Department stated that scheduling for video conferencing was communicated twice, but these communications bounced back. The Court considered these submissions in its decision.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order of assessment passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre is liable to be quashed for want of an opportunity of hearing through video conferencing, as required by the petitioner's request? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without affording them an opportunity of hearing through video conferencing, despite a specific request. Revenue's Contention: The respondent Department stated that the scheduling for video conferencing was communicated to the petitioner twice, but the communication bounced back. The Department did not otherwise contest the need for an opportunity of hearing.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 3RD BHADRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 22904 OF 2021 PETITIONER: M/S.ALLIANCE HOMES, FIRST FLOOR, PRESTIGE CENTRE, OPP.SUB-REGISTRAR OFFICE, KANNUR-670 002. REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE MANAGER, MOIDU.V. BY ADVS. C.AJITH KUMAR RAJEEVU L.G. RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI-110 003. 2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I, KANNUR-670 001. 3 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-I, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, OFFICE OF THE ADDL./JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KANNOTHUMCHAL, CHOVVA(P.O), KANNUR-670 006. BY ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 22904 OF 2021 2

JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by Ext.P11 order of assessment. The short contention taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that Ext.P11, which is an order by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, was issued without affording to the petitioner an opportunity of hearing through video conferencing despite specific request.

2.

When this matter is taken up for consideration today, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Department states that as per instructions received by him, the scheduling of video conferencing was communicated to the petitioner twice. However, it is seen that the said communication has bounced back for some reason.

3.

Having regard to the aforesaid submissions, Ext.P11 order of assessment will stand quashed. The assessment shall be completed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre afresh after affording an opportunity of WP(C) NO. 22904 OF 2021 3 hearing to the petitioner through video conferencing. The petitioner shall also be permitted to upload all documents that may be necessary for the petitioner to substantiate its case. The communication regarding video conferencing shall be sent to the following e-mail I.D's provided by the learned counsel for the petitioner:- ahaccounts@alliancehomes.in and ahaccounts@alliance.in The fresh assessment shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment. The writ petition will stand disposed of as above. GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK

WP(C) NO. 22904 OF 2021 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22904/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16/04/2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPUTATION STATEMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, 2017-18 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22/08/2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 30/08/2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22/11/2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25/11/2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 25/08/2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 30/08/2021 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 06/09/2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 15/09/2021 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WP(C) NO. 22904 OF 2021 5 DATED 24/09/2021 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF DEMAND DATED 24/09/2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →