K C AGGARWAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 61(1)

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/9584/2024HC DelhiDLHC01040887202416 July 2024Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition. The Court noted that the assessment orders were preceded by several notices issued to the petitioner, to which the petitioner had responded. Specifically, the last notice dated December 26, 2023, fixed the hearing for December 28, 2023. The petitioner, appearing in person, failed to point out any request for an oral hearing made in response to this notice. Consequently, the Court found no justification to invoke its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Court explicitly stated that the writ petition fails and stands dismissed. However, it left open the option for the petitioner to pursue available legal remedies against the final assessment orders. All rights and contentions of both parties were kept open.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, K C Aggarwal, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging assessment orders dated December 29, 2023, and a consequent demand. The petitioner contended that these orders were passed in violation of legal provisions and a previous High Court order dated December 15, 2022. The primary ground for challenging the assessment orders was the alleged lack of adequate opportunity of being heard. The respondent, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 61(1), had issued several notices to the petitioner post the disposal of the earlier writ petition. The judgment notes that the petitioner responded to all issued notices.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment orders dated December 29, 2023, are liable to be quashed for violating legal and constitutional provisions and the High Court's order dated December 15, 2022, particularly on the ground of not providing an adequate opportunity of being heard? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's contention: The assessment orders were passed without providing an adequate opportunity of being heard, violating legal and constitutional provisions and a previous High Court order. Revenue's contention: The revenue's contentions are not explicitly recorded in the judgment, but the judgment notes the issuance of multiple notices and the petitioner's responses to them.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~98 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9584/2024

K C AGGARWAL

.....Petitioner

Through: Petitioner in person

versus

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 61(1)

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, SSC with Mr. Shivendra Singh and Mr. Yojit Pareek, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

O R D E R %

16.07.2024 1. This writ petition has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:- “(i)Issue appropriate writs or directions for quashing, declaring null and void the impugned orders dated 29.12.2023 and consequent illegal demand raised by the said order passed pursuant to but in the violation of or without complying the legal and constitutional provisions s well as the orders dated 15.12.2022 passed by hon’ble high court in WPC 17084 of 2023. (ii) Declare as final the assessments of the petitioner for the AYs 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2005-06 as per ITR dated 31.12.2001, 19.08.2002 and 29.03.2006, respectively. (iii) Pass appropriate order and or directions for inquiring and punishing according to law the then ld. Additional CIT Mr. D.N. Kar and the then Ld. CIT. appeal Mr. Vinod Kumar for deliberately, knowingly, dishonestly and malafidely passing false and illegal orders against the petitioner. (iv) Pass such further order as may be considered just and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the assessment orders principally on the ground that he was not provided an adequate opportunity of being heard. 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 04/07/2025 at 01:45:17

3.

We note that the impugned order itself takes note of the various notices which had come to be issued to the writ petitioner post the disposal of the original writ petition on 15 December 2022. The details of the notices which were issued from time to time have been set out in a tabular form which is extracted hereinbelow: - “S. No. Notice Date of Issue Date of hearing Remarks 1. Letter issued 09.01.2023

Responded 2. 142(1) 18.11.2023 23.11.2023 Responded 3. 142(1) 01.12.2023 11.12.2023 Responded 4. Show Cause 15.12.2023 22.12.2023 Responded 5. Show Cause (change of incumbent) 19.12.2023 22.12.2023 Responded on 21.12.2023 6. Letter for final opportunity 26.12.2023 28.12.2023 Responded”

4.

As we peruse the last notice of 26 December 2023, we find that the next date fixed by the Assessing Officer was of 28 December 2023. The petitioner who appears in person has failed to draw our attention to any request for oral hearing that may have been made in response to the said notice. 5. In view of the aforesaid, we find no justification to invoke our extraordinary power conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution. 6. Accordingly, while the writ petition fails and stands dismissed, we leave it open to the writ petitioner to adopt such appropriate remedies as may be available in law against the final orders of assessment which have been framed. 7. All rights and contentions of respective parties are kept open.

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J. JULY 16, 2024/neha 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 04/07/2025 at 01:45:17

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →