SADHNA BROADCAST LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 22(2) DELHI & ANR.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/3941/2025HC DelhiDLHC01016691202528 March 2025Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the reassessment order did not fall foul of Article 14 of the Constitution of India on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court observed that while an assessee is entitled to a sufficient opportunity to respond to proposed additions, it is not a facet of natural justice that an AO must grant additional opportunities if a request is made, especially when sufficient opportunity has already been granted. The Court noted that the reassessment proceedings had been ongoing since March 2024, with multiple notices issued under various sections of the Act, and the show cause notice was issued after the petitioner had already provided information. Consequently, the petition was dismissed. However, the Court clarified that if the petitioner files an appeal against the impugned order, they would not be precluded from furnishing necessary material, including that which was not part of the original record.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Sadhna Broadcast Limited, challenged a reassessment order dated 27.02.2025, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT) for Assessment Year 2017-18 under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner contended that the order was passed in violation of natural justice as they were granted only one week to reply to a show cause notice issued on 17.02.2025, with the deadline being 24.02.2025. The petitioner filed an application for further time on the last date, which the Assessing Officer (AO) disregarded, proceeding to pass the impugned order. The reassessment proceedings had commenced on 26.03.2024 with a notice under Section 148, followed by notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reassessment order dated 27.02.2025, passed for AY 2017-18, is in violation of the principles of natural justice, thereby infringing Article 14 of the Constitution of India? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the one-week period granted to respond to the show cause notice was insufficient, and the AO's disregard of their request for an extension violated the principles of natural justice. They contended that a reasonable opportunity to respond was not provided. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the revenue. However, the court's reasoning implies that the revenue's position, as accepted by the court, was that sufficient opportunity had been provided, and the AO was not bound to grant additional opportunities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3941/2025 and CM APPLs. 18385-86/2025 SADHNA BROADCAST LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr Ruchesh Sinha with Ms Monalisa Maity, Advocates. versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 22(2) DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr Puneet Rai, SSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA O R D E R % 28.03.2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impuging a reassessment order dated 27.02.2025 [impugned order] passed by the Assessing Officer [AO] under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [Act] for Assessment Year [AY] 2017-18 along with the demand. It is the petitioner’s case that the impugned order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. The said contention is advanced on the premise that the petitioner was issued a show cause notice dated 17.02.2025 and was granted time till 17:05 hours of 24.02.2025 to furnish a reply. Thus, the petitioner was provided only one week to file its reply to the show cause notice. The petitioner did not respond to the show cause notice but on the last date i.e., on 24.02.2025 filed an application seeking further time to respond to the show cause notice. The AO This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 19:04:59

disregarded the said request and proceeded to pass the impugned order. 2. It is trite law that an assessee is required to be given sufficient opportunity to respond to any addition to the returned income that is proposed by the AO. However, it is not a facet of natural justice that despite sufficient opportunity being granted, the AO is also bound to give additional opportunities if a request is so made. It is also noticed in the present case the proceedings for reassessment had commenced on 26.03.2024 by issuance of the notice under Section 148 of the Act. Thereafter, on 30.08.2024 notices were also issued under Section 143(2) of the Act and the proceedings continued. Another notice was issued on 11.11.2024 under Section 142(1) of the Act. The show cause notice dated 17.02.2025 was issued after the petitioner had already provided information as sought for by the AO. 3. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, we are unable to accept that the impugned order falls foul of Article 14 of the Constitution of India on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice. The petition is accordingly dismissed. 4. However, we clarify that in the event the petitioner files an appeal against impugned order, it would not be precluded from furnishing such material as it considers necessary including materials, which were not a part of the record. VIBHU BAKHRU, J TEJAS KARIA, J MARCH 28, 2025/tr Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 19:04:59

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →