HL CHOPRA STEEL ROLLING MILLS vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSEMENT CENTRE

128 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

CWP-12405-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 24.08.2026 M/S HL CHOPRA STEEL ROLLING MILLS ....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE ….RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:- HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present: Mr. Sunil K. Mukhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vidul Kapoor, Junior Standing Counsel for the respondent-Income Tax Department. ***** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging an order of assessment, notwithstanding the availability of an alternative remedy of appeal, primarily on the ground that the documents which have been relied upon have not been supplied to the petitioner and that an opportunity of cross-examination has also not been given to the petitioner. 2.

In support of such contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the following orders/judgments:- Sr. No. Name of the order/judgment Case No(s)/Citation(s) Date of decision 1 Union of India & others v. Ashish Agarwal Civil Appeal No.3005/2022 04.05.2022 2 Baljeet Singh v. Income Tax Officer and others CWP No.4818/2023 23.03.2023 3 HL Chopra Steel v. National Faceless Assessment Centre NFAC Income Tax Department Ministry of Finance CWP No.9267/2024 24.04.2024 RAHUL JOSHI 2026.08.29 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

CWP-12405-2026 (O&M)

2 4 Randhir Sood v. ITO CWP No.9451/2022 19.05.2022 5 Sona Builders v. Union of India and others 251 ITR 197 (SC) 24.07.2001 6 Berger Paints India Ltd v. CIT Appeal (Civil) 1081- 1083/2024 17.02.2004 3.

It is also submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that all documents relied upon against the assessee have to be supplied within 30 days and, since such documents have not been furnished to the petitioner within 30 days, the instant writ petition is liable to be entertained notwithstanding the remedy of appeal. 4.

It is further submitted that cross-examination has not been allowed despite the prayer made and, in support of such submission, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the following judgments:- Sr. No. Name of the order/judgment Case No(s)/Citation(s)/DOD 1. Kishinchand Chellaram v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City-II (1980) 125 ITR 0713 2. Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd v. CIT. 26 ITR 775 (SC) 3. KrownAgro Foods (P.) Ltd v. ACIT, Circle 5(1), New Delhi 2015 57 Taxmann.com 355 High Court of Delhi 4. Fire Arcor Infrastructure Pvt Ltd v. Commission of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(1), Nagpur, Bombay High Court ITA No.30 of 2018 decided on 23.07.2019 5. Smt. Sunita Dhadda v. Dy. CIT ITA No.751/JP/2011 6. M/s R. W. Promotions Pvt Ltd, Mumbai v. ACIT ITA No.1489 of 2013 decided on 13.07.2015 7. State of Kerala v. K. T. Shaduli Grocery Dealer etc. (1977) 2 SCC 777 8. Andaman Timber Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise (2015) (2015) 281 CTR 214 (SC) 9. State of Madhya Pradesh v. Chintaman Sadashiva Waishampayan AIR 1961 SC 1623 10. Rajiv Arora v. Union of India and AIR 2009 SC 1100 RAHUL JOSHI 2026.08.29 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

CWP-12405-2026 (O&M)

3 others 11. Laxmanbhai S. Patel v. CIT 327 ITR 291 (2010) 12. Kalra Glass Factory v. Sales Tax Tribunal SC 167 ITR 488 of 1987 13. Alok Agrawal v. DCIT 67 TTJ 109 5.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material appended to the instant writ petition. 6.

The petitioner is an income-tax assessee who had submitted its return for the Assessment Year 2024-25 along with the computation of income, balance sheet, profit and loss account, and tax audit report. A notice under Section 143(2) was issued to the petitioner fixing the case for scrutiny. This was followed by various notices issued to the petitioner, to which the petitioner submitted its replies. 7.

Upon consideration of all such material, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 144(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, quantifying the petitioner’s total income at Rs.11,49,23,629/-. Penalty proceedings have also been initiated against the petitioner. The order records that the income as per the return submitted by the petitioner was Rs.4,10,63,860/-, while the unsecured loan was assessed at Rs.5,09,61,961/- and unexplained cash credit at Rs.2,28,97,808/-. 8.

The assessment order has been examined by us in light of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. 9.

In addition to the income disclosed by the petitioner in its return, the assessee had claimed unsecured loans from different parties. This included an amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/- advanced by Sh. Navinder RAHUL JOSHI 2026.08.29 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

CWP-12405-2026 (O&M)

4 Pal Chopra (HUF) to the petitioner. Further, this amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/- was received by the HUF from Sh. Rakesh Kumar. From the income-tax return of Sh. Navinder Pal Chopra, it was found that he had declared his total income as Rs.6,35,940/-, which consisted wholly of interest income for Assessment Year 2024-25. No additional income was reported from any other source in the return. 10.

Similar unsecured loans have been shown from Sh. Rakesh Kumar, who had declared his total income as Rs.10,74,090/- and had received salary as an employee of the petitioner. The chain of transactions has been elaborately noticed to find that similar unsecured loans had been received from others, including Gaurav Chopra, who had declared an income of only Rs.12,22,020/- but had advanced funds to the extent of Rs.3,99,11,961/-. Such transactions have been elaborately discussed in the assessment order to hold that the assessee’s claim that unsecured loans amounting to Rs.5,09,61,961/- were received, during the relevant year was not worthy of acceptance. 11.

The assessment order also records that a search and seizure operation was carried out against M/s Vardhman Adarsh Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Upon perusal of the documents and material, it was found that the assessee had entered into transactions in the nature of scrap sales amounting to Rs.2,28,97,808/- with M/s Vardhman Adarsh Ispat Pvt. Ltd. A statement of the Assistant Accountant of M/s Vardhman Adarsh Ispat Pvt. Ltd., was recorded during the search proceedings, according to which the alleged scrap sale was, in fact, a bogus bill/invoice in the RAHUL JOSHI 2026.08.29 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

CWP-12405-2026 (O&M)

5 nature of an accommodation entry, and the goods had not actually been received by M/s Vardhman Adarsh Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Relying upon the above material, the assessment order came to be passed. 12.

The argument advanced on behalf of the petitioner that the documents had not been supplied to him in time is disputed in view of the observations and findings contained in the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. As regards the allegation of non-grant of an opportunity for cross-examination, the Assessing Officer has recorded that the assessment order was primarily passed relying upon documentary evidence and surrounding facts gathered during the investigation and that a reasonable opportunity to respond had been given to the petitioner. The Assessing Officer has relied upon a series of judgments wherein it has been held that natural justice is no unruly horse, no lurking landmine, nor a judicial cure-all. If fairness is shown by the decision-maker to the person proceeded against, the form, features, and fundamentals of such essential procedural propriety, being conditioned by the facts and circumstances of each situation, no breach of natural justice can be complained of. The unnatural expansion of natural justice without reference to the administrative realities and other factors of a given case can be exasperating. It has also been observed that in the facts of the case, adequate opportunity had already been given to the petitioner. 13.

Considering the recitals contained in the assessment order and the factual issues raised by the petitioner, we are of the view that this is not a case for bypassing the statutory alternative remedy of appeal RAHUL JOSHI 2026.08.29 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

CWP-12405-2026 (O&M)

6 available to the petitioner. The judgments relied upon by the petitioner are not applicable to the facts of the instant case, as noticed above. 14.

Though we had indicated so during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner insisted that all the judgments relied upon by him be taken note of. We have accordingly recorded the submissions of the petitioner and are of the considered view that in the facts of the case, there is no justification for this Court to bypass the alternative remedy and directly entertain the writ petition. 15.

In that view of the matter, the instant writ petition is dismissed on account of the availability of an alternative remedy. 16.

All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. [ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA] ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE [ROHIT KAPOOR]

JUDGE AUGUST 24, 2026 Rahul Joshi 1. Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No 2. Whether Reportable Yes/No RAHUL JOSHI 2026.08.29 11:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD