Allowed

B Sujith Kumar v. the Income Tax Officer

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Mar 2020WP/2996/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the Writ Petition holding that the assessing authority violated the principles of natural justice by disregarding objections submitted by the petitioner. The assessment order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of being heard.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order of assessment dated 22.12.2018 is set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh consideration after giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.

B Sujith Kumar Vs the Income Tax Officer — Income Tax | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶3

AND

¶4

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITION No.2996 of 2019

¶6

ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice A.V. Sesha Sai)

¶7

Heard Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, learned counsel for petitioner and Smt M.Kiranmayee, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax.

¶8

Order of assessment bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/144/201819/1014512703(1), dated 22.12.2018 for the assessment year 2016-17 passed by the respondent herein, is under challenge in the present Writ Petition.

¶9

The only issue that has been canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the present Writ Petition is that the assessing authority issued the order under challenge in contravention of the principles of natural justice and without considering the objections submitted by the petitioner through online, dated 11.10.2018.

¶10

The assessing authority issued a notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 01.10.2018. According to the petitioner, he submitted his objections to the said notice on 11.10.2018. In the impugned order, the assessing authority observed that the assessee did not respond to the notice, dated 01.10.2018, but peculiarly in the counter affidavit filed by the

¶11

¶12

assessing authority, reference is made to the receipt of the said objections.

¶13

It is a settled and well established principle of law that any action which has civil consequences must necessarily be preceded by notice and opportunity of being heard to the persons likely affected by such action. In the considered opinion of this Court, in the instant case, the assessing authority adhered to the said principle in breach and the said action is a patent violation of principles of natural justice. On this ground alone, this Writ Petition is liable to be allowed.

¶14

For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the order of assessment, dated 22.12.2018 passed by the respondent. The matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration for passing appropriate order, strictly in accordance with law, after considering the objections of the petitioner and by giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.

¶15

There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ Petition.

¶16

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any in the

¶17

Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶18

__________________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J

¶19

_________________________ R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

¶20

05.03.2020 MP

B Sujith Kumar v. the Income Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B Sujith Kumar v. the Income Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeswari Bojjagani Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

V Krishna Murthy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

A.Kananka Prasad Rao. Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B.Gopala Bhagya Lakshmi Vs The Commissioner and Director of Intermediate

M/s.Meghraj Moolchand and Sons Vs The Commisssioner of Income Tax-I

S.T.a.T., Hyd Vs M/S. Pratap Industries