Allowed

V.P.Hasna v. the Additional/Joint /Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer

Kerala HC26 Oct 2023WP(C)/12849/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the writ petition challenging an assessment order passed under the Faceless Assessment Scheme due to lack of cross-examination opportunities. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the jurisdictional Central Circle for fresh assessment.

What did the court decide?

Impugned assessment order set aside; case remanded to jurisdictional Central Circle, Thrissur, for assessment afresh.

V.P.Hasna Vs the Additional/Joint /Deputy/Assistant Commissioner… — Income Tax | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH THURSDAY, THE 26^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 4TH KARTHIKA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 12849 OF 2022

¶4

PETITIONER/S:

¶5

V.P.HASNA AGED 32 YEARS VADAKKUMPALA HOUSE, BASHEER BUILDINGS, THAZHE CHOVVA, KANNUR-670018.

¶6

BY ADVS. HARISANKAR V. MENON MEERA V.MENON

¶7

RESPONDENT/S:

¶8

THE ADDITIONAL/JOINT /DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI-110001.

¶9

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY

¶10

DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

WP(C) NO. 12849 OF 2022

¶12

¶13

J U D G M E N T

¶14

The present writ petition has been filed impugning the assessment order, Ext.P8, passed by the respondent under the provisions of Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act', for short), after conducting search and survey operations in the premises of the petitioner and third parties. The order impugned herein was passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre.

¶15

The writ petition has been filed impugning the assessment order, Ext.P8, on the ground that the petitioner was not given copies of statements of third parties recorded under Section 131 of the Act and did not afford an opportunity to crossexamine the persons, whose statements were recorded as above, which were considered while finalising the assessment.

¶16

Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent. It has been stated in paragraph No.11 of the counter affidavit that it could be realised that under the Faceless Assessment Scheme,

¶17

WP(C) NO. 12849 OF 2022

¶18

¶19

because of its limitation, it is difficult to provide the assessee an opportunity to get copies of the statements recorded under Section 131 of the Act and conduct cross-examination of the persons, whose statements were recorded under Section 131 of the Act. It has been further stated that as per the current CBDT guidelines, all cases, where survey and search operations have been carried out, are to be centralised and assessment in such cases are to be completed in physical mode and not under the Faceless Assessment Scheme. Based on these guidelines, assessment proceedings in the case of the assessee herein for the assessment year 2018-19 has already been re-opened and centralised to the jurisdictional central circle., i.e., Central Circle, Thrissur. It has been submitted that in view thereof, this Court may set aside the impugned assessment order herein with direction to centralise the petitioner's case with the jurisdictional Central Circle for assessment afresh, in accordance with law.

¶20

WP(C) NO. 12849 OF 2022

¶21

¶22

Considering the aforesaid stand of the respondent in the counter affidavit, the present writ petition is allowed and the order impugned herein, Ext.P8, is set aside. The petitioner's case is directed to be considered by the jurisdictional Central Circle, Thrissur, in accordance with law, and finalise the assessment proceedings. Needless to say that since the matter has been remanded back, the petitioner will not be able to raise objection of limitation in finalising the assessment. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the assessment order so passed by the respondent, it will be open to her to take further proceedings that could be available to her under the Act.

¶23

Pending interlocutory application, if any, in the writ petition stands dismissed.

¶24

Sd/DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE

¶25

¶26

WP(C) NO. 12849 OF 2022

¶27

¶28

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12849/2022

¶29

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶30

Exhibit P1	COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITY
Exhibit P2	COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P3	COPY OF REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P4	COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5	COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6	COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT
Exhibit P7	COPY OF LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8	COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.

V.P.Hasna v. the Additional/Joint /Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/Income Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.P.Hasna v. the Additional/Joint /Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax/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

Parvathy K, Vs the Secretary

Arthinkal Village Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. NO.3772, Vs Assistant Commissioner

Muhammed Munees A.K Vs New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Platino Classic Motors India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise

Reo Paul, Vs Union of India

Lazar Robert Vs Corporation of Kochi