KRIYA VIKRAYA SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

CW/4354/2023HC RajasthanRJHC02020049202319 November 2024Author: AVNEESH JHINGAN,ASHUTOSH KUMAR3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the impugned assessment order dated 08.09.2022 is set aside. The reasoning was that despite the revenue's claim of multiple opportunities, the petitioner was unable to upload their reply due to persistent technical glitches in the portal, even after extensions were granted. This resulted in a violation of the principles of natural justice, as the petitioner was denied a fair opportunity to present their case. The Tribunal acknowledged the petitioner's undertaking not to raise the objection of the assessment being time-barred if granted one opportunity to file a response. The assessing officer is directed to proceed with the show-cause notice dated 29.06.2021 in accordance with law and provide an opportunity to file the reply. The assessment order is set aside subject to the petitioner's undertaking. The Tribunal also expressed a desirability for the assessing officer to complete the proceedings expeditiously.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kriya Vikraya Sahakari Samiti Limited, a co-operative society, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 08.09.2022 for assessment year 2020-21. The petitioner claimed eligibility for deduction under Section 80-P of the Income Tax Act, 1961. A show-cause notice under Section 143(2) for faceless assessment was issued on 29.06.2021. The petitioner faced technical glitches preventing them from uploading their reply on the portal. Despite raising grievances with the National Faceless Assessment Centre and being granted extensions, they were unable to file their response. Subsequently, an assessment order was passed before they could submit their reply, leading to this petition.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order dated 08.09.2022 passed for assessment year 2020-21 is liable to be quashed on the grounds of violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the denial of an opportunity to file a reply due to technical glitches in the faceless assessment portal, as per Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contentions: - The petitioner argued that due to technical glitches in the portal, they were unable to file their reply to the show-cause notice, thereby being denied an opportunity to defend their case. - The figures of sale and purchase of agricultural produce of its members, which the petitioner added to its income, were wrongly added to its income. - Reliance was placed on Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, (1998) 8 SCC 1, for interference in writ jurisdiction despite statutory remedy. Revenue's Contentions: - The respondent submitted that the petitioner was granted eight opportunities to file a reply, but failed to do so. - The tabular chart in their reply indicated multiple opportunities were given.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 80-P

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[2024:RJ-JP:47438-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4354/2023 Kriya Vikraya Sahakari Samiti Limited, Having Its Registered Address At Pala B.o., Ram Nagar, Kumher, Bharatpur - 321301, Rajasthan, India Through Its Authorized Signatory Akash Mittal Son Of Jitendra Kumar, Aged About 23 Years, Resident Of Gulal Kund, Outside Mathura Gate, Bharatpur - 321001, Rajasthan, India. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Bharatpur, Having Its Address At Income Tax Department, Goverdhan Gate, Near Head Post Office, Bharatpur - 321001, Rajasthan, India 2. The Income Tax Officer, Faceless Assessment Centre (Nfac), Having Its Address At Income Tax Department, Room Number 401, 2Nd Floor, Near Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi - 110003, Delhi, India. 3. The Central Board Of Direct Taxes (Cbdt), Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of India, Through Its Chairman, Having Its Address At South Block, New Delhi, Delhi, India - 110011 4. Additional Director E-Services, Central Board Of Direct Taxes (Cbdt) (Income Tax), Having Its Address At 4Th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Connaught Circus, New Delhi- 110001. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prateek Kedawat with Mr. Mohd. Bilal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anuroop Singhi with Mr. NS Bhati HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

Order 19/11/2024 AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (ORAL):-

This petition is filed seeking quashing of assessment order dated 08.09.2022 passed for assessment year 2020-21. [2024:RJ-JP:47438-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-4354/2023]

The brief facts are that the petitioner is a co-operative society and as per pleading petitioner is eligible for deduction under Section 80-P of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity ‘the Act’). A show-cause notice (for short 'SCN') under Section 143(2) for framing a faceless assessment was issued on 29.06.2021. The reply could not be uploaded on portal due to technical glitch. The petitioner raised a grievance before the National Faceless Assessment Centre vide application dated 03.05.2022 and was granted five days time on 24.08.2022. The petitioner was again not successful in uploading the reply on the portal. The grievance was brought to the notice of the Central Board of Direct Taxes vide application dated 01.09.2022 but in the meantime, assessment order dated 08.09.2022 was passed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to technical glitch in portal the reply could not be filed. The petitioner was denied the opportunity to defend the case. The contention is that the petitioner-society is indulging in sale and purchase of agriculture produce of its member and these figures of sale purchase has been added to income of petitioner.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that petitioner was granted eight opportunities to file reply but the needful was not done.

Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage on instructions from the client submits that in case one opportunity is granted to file a response to the notice, the petitioner shall not raise the objection of the assessment being time barred.

The reliance of the learned counsel for the respondent on the tabular chart reproduced in the reply to show that eight

[2024:RJ-JP:47438-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-4354/2023] Chandan/32 Whether Reportable: Yes / No

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →