Bharat Lakhotia v. Chief Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Raipurchhattisgarh Pin

Digitallysigned bySHYNASHYNAAJAYAJAYDate:2025.04.0814:48:44+0530 2025:CGHC:16316 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 51 of 2025 1 - Bharat Lakhotia S/o Late Shri Dwarika Das Lakhotia, Aged About 58 Years, 67/4,Gurudwara Road, Nehru Nagar (West), Bhilai, P.O. and P.S. Supela, Bhilai, Tahsiland District Durg Chhattisgarh Pin - 490020 Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chief Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, RaipurChhattisgarh Pin 492001 2 - Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Aaykar Bhawan, Civil Lines, RaipurChhattisgarh Pin 492001 3 - Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bungalow No. 32/32Bungalows, Amdi Nagar HUDCO, Bhilai, Distt. Durg Chhattisgarh 4 Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income-TaxDepartment, Through Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, NFAC North Block,New Delhi ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) :Mr. S. Rajeswara Rao, Advocate For Respondent(s) :Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Amit Choudhari, Advocate S B.: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order on Board 07/04/2025 1. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiafor the following reliefs : (i)To call for the relevant records of the respondentsfor its kind perusal. (ii)To declare illegal and quash impugned order undersection 148A(d) of the Act and notice issued under Section148 of the Act {Annexure P/1) (colly)} and all proceedingsflowing through said notice. (iii)To declare illegal and quash the impugned orderpassed under section 147 read with sec. 144B of theIncome-tax Act and all the proceedings flowing throughsaid order. (iv)To quash all the notice including demand noticeissued under section 156, penalty notice issued undersections 274 read with section 271AAC(1) of the Income-tax Act. (v)To stay the effect and operation of impugned orderand all consequential proceedings including penaltyproceedings, recovery proceedings and direct theRespondents not to initiate any coercive action againstpetitioner till disposal of present petition. (vi)To pass such other and/or further order and/ororders as the Hon’ble High Court may deem fit and properin the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that for theAssessment Year 2017-18, respondent No. 3 initiated reassessmentproceedings on the basis of the order passed under Section 148-A(d)of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) with the approval of thespecified authorities. However, he would submit that in the approvalaccorded, there is no signature of the competent authority as perSection 282 A(1) of the Act. He would further submit that the noticehas been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer but theAssessment Order has been passed by the Faceless AssessmentOfficer. He would further submit that though the petitioner has madespecific demand under Section 144B (6) (vii) (viii) of the Act forpersonal hearing through video conferencing or video telephony, but nosuch opportunity has been granted to the petitioner before passing theorder impugned. For the sake brevity, the said provision is reproducedhereunder : 144B(6) (vii) in a case where a variation is proposed in theincome or loss determination proposal or the draft order, and anopportunity is provided to the assessee by serving a notice callingupon him to show cause as to why the assessment should not becompleted as per such income or loss determination proposal, theassessee or his authorised representative, as the case may be,may request for personal hearing so as to make his oral submissions or present his case before the income-tax authorityof the relevant unit; 144B(6) (vii) in a case where a variation is proposed in theincome or loss determination proposal or the draft order, and anopportunity is provided to the assessee by serving a notice callingupon him to show cause as to why the assessment should not becompleted as per such income or loss determination proposal, theassessee or his authorised representative, as the case may be,may request for personal hearing so as to make his oral submissions or present his case before the income-tax authorityof the relevant unit; (viii) where the request for personal hearing has been received,the income-tax authority of relevant unit shall allow such hearing,through National Faceless Assessment Centre, which shall beconducted exclusively through video conferencing or videotelephony, including use of any telecommunication applicationsoftware which supports video conferencing or video telephony, tothe extent technologically feasible, in accordance with theprocedure laid down by the Board; 3. Learned counsel would further submit that in the matter of RashmiLakotia Vs. Union of India and others (WPT Nos.241/2022, Orderdated 10.11.2022) {Neutral Citation No. 2022:CGHC:25449}, whiledealing with the similar issue, this Court has taken a view that theprinciples of natural justice is required to be followed and anopportunity of personal hearing ought to be granted to the petitionertherein under Section 144B (6) (vii) (viii) of the Act, therefore, thematter was remitted to the competent authority for deciding the sameafresh after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to thepetitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the Revenue would submit that though variousopportunities have been granted to the petitioner, but he has not madespecific demand for personal hearing. He would draw attention of thisCourt towards para 2 of the impugned order, which shows that variousopportunities have been granted to the petitioner. However, learnedcounsel admits that no opportunity of hearing has been granted to thepetitioner through video conferencing or video telephony.opportunities have been granted to the petitioner, but he has not madespecific demand for personal hearing. He would draw attention of thisCourt towards para 2 of the impugned order, which shows that variousopportunities have been granted to the petitioner. However, learnedcounsel admits that no opportunity of hearing has been granted to thepetitioner through video conferencing or video telephony. Shyna 5 5. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the partiesparticularly considering the fact that there is a specific mandate underSection 144B (6) (vii) (viii) of the Act for providing an opportunity ofpersonal hearing to the assessee, this Court is of the view that anopportunity be afforded to the petitioner in respect of the assessmentunder challenge in the present writ petition and after affording areasonable opportunity of hearing, the authority may pass a freshparticularly considering the fact that there is a specific mandate underSection 144B (6) (vii) (viii) of the Act for providing an opportunity ofpersonal hearing to the assessee, this Court is of the view that anopportunity be afforded to the petitioner in respect of the assessmentunder challenge in the present writ petition and after affording areasonable opportunity of hearing, the authority may pass a fresh order. order. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.7. It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of theassessment made by the Assessing Authority. The concerned Authoritywould be free to take an appropriate decision after hearing thepetitioner. Furthermore, it is observed that the petitioner would be atliberty to raise all the grounds raised in the present writ petition beforethe Assessing Officer, if so advised.7. It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of theassessment made by the Assessing Authority. The concerned Authoritywould be free to take an appropriate decision after hearing thepetitioner. Furthermore, it is observed that the petitioner would be atliberty to raise all the grounds raised in the present writ petition beforethe Assessing Officer, if so advised. Sd/- ( Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Judge